myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Big Oil and citizenship
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 31, 32, 33  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mrgybe knows wildly inaccurate.

Cheney didn't meet secretly with oil company officials and keep no records? No Exxon officials among them. Playing insider games is good for the goose, but not for the gander.

The point about hiring people with environmental credibility obviously went wildly over his head.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1927

PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm confused....which one of you is "Bruiser?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CB--My nickname when I wrestled was mangler. Obviously tongue in cheek, but if the Wizard of Ooze sticks, I can live with Bruiser.

There is, to be sure, rich irony in the story of Lisa Jackson and mrgybe's seizure of this as a metric for the ethical behavior of the fossil fuel industry. I didn't see the stories about the e-mail request when she resigned as head of EPA. Perhaps that was because the "lame stream" media dotes on Obama and his appointees, or perhaps that is because it was only news in the conservative media--who had been calling for Jackson's head since she moved forward with regulation of CO2 as a pollutant in response to a court decision. The story of her resignation that was reported was largely about her frustration with Obama for delaying a strengthening of the particulate standards. Her recommendation that Obama block the Keystone pipeline was only one of the reasons that the oil industry was out to get her.

Perhaps she violated some ethical standard in having a separate e-mail account that the Heritage "faith tank" couldn't find, but I doubt it. The story posted by mrgybe dates back to January, and the rest of the story runs like this. Apparently the head of EPA, and the heads of many agencies, receive hundreds of thousands of e-mails every day, and they are assigned to staff to respond. Obviously she sees none of these unless the response requires her approval. So there are secondary e-mail accounts that she, and other top officials, use. The question is whether she tried to do official business on an e-mail account that was "hidden" from the conservatives to avoid scrutiny. Public officials are required to retain all records, electronic and written, for a prescribed period of time if those records are kept "in the normal course of business." The story dates to January, and Republicans in Congress insisted on the release of her e-mails. If there was a smoking gun there, I can't imagine the fossil fuel industry not bragging about it--as they bragged about being responsible for her resignation.

Two rich areas of irony remain. First, the narrative adopted in the article referenced by mrgybe had Lisa Jackson somehow communicating secretly with opponents of coal. (Coal usage has dropped due to the success of fracking, not to regulation.) The conservatives subscribing to this narrative somehow failed to realize that such concerns also indicted Cheney's practice of meeting privately in the White House with the fossil fuel industry--and keeping no records. If I remember the facts accurately, those meetings resulted in an exemption to the Clean Drinking Water Act's regulatory system for fracking. In either event, the public's work should be done in public, and I would be disappointed in Lisa Jackson if she failed to meet that standard.

In the context of the Keystone pipeline and mrgybe's hysteria over rapid approval, this is so funny I can barely believe it. EPA is given a special authority under the National Environmental Policy Act to review both the adequacy of EIS's, and the environmental impacts of the projects that they cover. Obviously the industry, and mrgybe, are blind to the problems that they have with credibility. Unless they can get an outright exemption, they are subject to the laws and the procedures. Rapid approval of the Keystone pipeline would almost certainly have been successfully challenged in court. If my memory is accurate, EPA gave the project and the EIS its lowest possible rating--Inadequate EIS and environmentally unacceptable project. A rapid approval without fixing the problems in the EIS and mitigating impacts would have probably doomed the project. I made this comment nearly a year ago.

Mrgybe's frustration and anger about environmental laws are certainly symbolic of the fossil fuel industries approach to environmental issues. Hire discredited tobacco "scientists" to debunk global warming, and fight regulation based on public health concerns to protect profits. The comment I made, virtually ignored by mrgybe, was that hiring someone who actually knows the laws and has credibility--whether it is Lisa Jackson or someone else--makes good business sense.

I think his ego is bruised.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2615

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bruiser wrote:
There is, to be sure, rich irony in the story of Lisa Jackson...I didn't see the stories about the e-mail request when she resigned as head of EPA.

Bruiser Bounce in all its glory!! Every time.......every time he is called on some silly accusation he has to back off, change the subject and make another silly accusation. Irony indeed. Demonstrates that relying on media outlets that merely reinforce one's prejudices leaves the myopic reader/ listener poorly informed.

bruiser wrote:
Perhaps she violated some ethical standard in having a separate e-mail account that the Heritage "faith tank" couldn't find, but I doubt it.

You're probably right. Her resignation, within days of the email scandal breaking, probably had nothing to do with it.

bruiser wrote:
If there was a smoking gun there, I can't imagine the fossil fuel industry not bragging about it--as they bragged about being responsible for her resignation

Citation please.........oh, wait, don't bother........I nearly forgot about step 3 of the Bruiser Bounce. Just another silly accusation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What silly accusation? I posted a link that a noted environmental figure went to work for Apple, and said that the oil industry is uninterested in credibility. I stand by that, whatever Lisa Jackson may, or may not, have done. Your attack on Lisa Jackson was, as usual, picking a nit and ignoring the elephant in the room.

I'm particularly interested in your detailed response on the inadequate EIS for the Keystone Pipeline, and your strategic approach to actually getting projects entitled under the law. You were dead wrong on the background about Chevron's Richmond project--the facts and the concerns about sour crude and deteriorating pipes posted above. What, you had no response when your wild accusations that the only problem with refinery expansion was unreasonable enviros was shown to be wrong?

Your response is to ignore what doesn't fit your talking points--from oxygenates to corroded pipes and ignored safety programs. But if you have a real source for an update on Lisa Jackson that bears out your accusation, bring it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2615

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess a top government official resigning because of unethical behavior is just a nit these days......it's becoming increasingly clear that unethical behavior is common within this Administration. However, the silly accusation du jour was actually the one where you stated that the carbon industry "bragged about being responsible for her resignation". I know that you would like to provide a reputable citation for that accusation so that we can all see that you don't just make stuff up.

Taking of government officials that have or should resign, the media you frequent will not have shown the attached. You will dismiss the testimony as just another ignorant tea party wing nut. You will be wrong. It is exceptionally eloquent and well done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RQzAbBk5lg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mr "I may be serially insensitive but I'm no bigot" now has provided specifics for his claim of my wild accusations:

Quote:
However, the silly accusation du jour was actually the one where you stated that the carbon industry "bragged about being responsible for her resignation". I know that you would like to provide a reputable citation


My bad, I thought it was obvious. The oil company executive apoplectic about Lisa Jackson was a retired Exxon man who wears the Avatar "mrgybe". I thought it was obvious. As was the crowing in the right wing blogosphere, which somehow got the message to you.

As I said, I welcome any updates on the story that shows that the e-mails actually violated the legal standards. I salute your new found concern over ethics in government, and want to make sure that you apply it equally across the party divide. You thus may want to comment on the imminent release of Randy Duke, a GOP and defense stalwart, about to be released from prison for his conviction on bribery. I know that you respect our judicial code, and understand that a conviction on bribery is more serious than a parallel e-mail account? I also await your comments on the implications of the Vice President's secret meetings with your colleagues? Perhaps you kept notes that can now be released?

I also note your silence on the main point of my message, which was the importance of some environmental credibility to business success? Not so in the Exxon world, raw power is enough?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3520
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Im still hoping to see the steel cage match. Berkeley Bruiser 9.0 sailor VS Strength Trainer six figure tax payer. Winner gets lifetime supply of viagra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5777

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"You will dismiss the testimony as just another ignorant tea party wing nut. You will be wrong. It is exceptionally eloquent and well done."


It must have been Becky Gerritson's lofty idea that folks immigrated to the US to realize freedom and liberty, the kind she remembered before the government got out of control, that rang your bell. Or maybe it was the emotions that welled up a couple times during her pointed comments. Well, none of her drama and BS fooled me.

Let's look at the heart of the matter. It's all about setting up a politically focused tax exempt organization. The IRS or the government wasn't curbing her and her husband's freedom and liberty. That's total crap. Moreover, I think she was confusing the issue of actually being a tax exempt organization and applying to be one. Contrary to her statements, I think the questions that were asked by the IRS were more than reasonable under the circumstances. I think most thoughtful folks realize that the Supreme Court's Citizen's United decision created new territory that was highly questionable and suspect. Also, one has to ask themselves whether IRS personnel and management were fully prepared to review and judge whether quazi political organizations should be granted tax exempt status. I would suggest that you read the more recent article in the New York Times covering the IRS's actions over the time frame since 2010. I think most folks with any real experience in the real world understand that it takes time and effort to get a major project or effort off the ground and running smoothly. I don't buy the "attack the government BS" that folks like Gerritson cough up to back their specious goals and fake patriotism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be sure Becky Gerritson's testimony was covered in the Bay area media. It is an act of either profound ignorance, or profound chutzpah, to conflate the right to express political opinions to also involve a perceived right to be tax exempt in doing so. Perhaps between Becky and the poster we have both at work.

With that said, the comments about the IRS culture and public service are well taken and on point. I have been audited by the IRS, and was treated as if I had done something wrong. I came to the meeting with my accountant and my records, and a recording device, and the audit was dropped because I had clearly operated in a legal manner. Many governmental officials, particularly the ones at the local government level, seem to not understand that they are serving the public. In the case of the IRS, some of this comes from being lied to a lot. This does not excuse the behavior, and it is a legitimate criticism. It had, to be sure, nothing to do with my politics, but merely whether or not I had a right to the exemptions I claimed.

Blaming the IRS culture (or that of the Corps of Engineers, or any other long-standing agency), or the TARP program, on Obama is another matter entirely. But as with some giving defense contractors a pass for bribery, while lambasting Hillary's staff for editing talking points, using very different criteria to judge Republican and Democratic administrations is simply evidence of profound bias.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 31, 32, 33  Next
Page 3 of 33

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group