BP Shakedown Cop-Out

Friends:

The is adapted from an e-mail message I sent to Todd Schnitt, after hearing his idiocy regarding the Shakedown of BP by the Tyrant-and-Liar-in-Chief (a/k/a T&LIC, i.e., Obama):

Schnitt:

I am not happy to hear that you espouse and agree with Rahm Emanuel’s philosophy that “we should never let a good emergency go to waste.” Unfortunately, that is the attitude of tyrants and despots—the tyrants and despots that now occupy the White House and control our government. I have known for a while that you have a bit of a lefty bent to you and your rant about the shakedown during the 4:00 p.m. hour on your June 17, 2010 show confirmed it.

I agree that the oil spill is a disaster. I agree that BP has a huge share of the responsibility for the spill and the damage it has and will continue to cause. However, they should not be held responsible for ALL the damages caused to everyone along the Gulf Coast. Legally, they would not be responsible for the damages caused by the moratorium on drilling, etc., put in place by the Tyrant-and-Liar-in-Chief (a/k/a T&LIC, i.e., Obama). In legal parlance, the moratorium is an unforeseeable, superseding, intervening cause of the damages to all those who have been put out of work by the moratorium. There was no need for that action . . . unless you are trying to destroy the industry, or take it over. When the Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred, the shipping of oil in tankers was not shut down. When a plane crashes, killing hundreds of people, the government does not ground all flights. When a car crashes and kills people, the government does not stop people from driving. The moratorium was an extreme overreaction by the T&LIC. He had no clue, and still does not have any clue, about how to manage this disaster. So, to look like he is doing something, the T&LIC resorts to bullying. Those tactics work just fine in Chicago, especially since corruption is normal in Chicago. They are morally and legally reprehensible when done by a president.

There is a more important principle here that you are completely ignoring. This is a nation of laws and not of men or of emotions. Your reaction in this situation is purely emotional. BP has admitted that they were responsible and would pay all “legitimate” claims. They have been paying legitimate claims. They have been paying for clean-up. Because we are a nation of laws, laws should be used to solve this problem, not bullying tactics. The T&LIC and his regime have done more to prevent the resolution of this problem, than they have done to provide solutions or assistance. But, this is typical of what happens when government and bureaucracies get involved.

Once you get your emotions out of the way and analyze the situation logically and objectively, you cannot conclude anything but that the $20 Billion Escrow Fund set up by BP was a shakedown by the regime. If it was “voluntary” as you claim, they would have set it up sooner. There is no doubt that the regime threatened BP with all kinds of prosecutions and legal action, including taking them over, if they did not pony up. But, to you and the regime, it appears that the rule of law does not matter in this case. This is exactly the kind of thing the FDR regime pulled during the depression. It outrages me that the rule of law and the Constitution are discarded, just because there is a disaster like this.

I fully support Barton’s initial apology. Just because Boehner, Miller and other repukegans don’t like what Barton said, doesn’t mean they are right or that you are right. You are bootstrapping your argument that Barton’s comment was wrong by using other repukegans who disagree with his assessment of the situation. You claim to be an independent thinker who calls it like it is. So, what happened to calling it like it is? I guess, you call it like it is only so long as your desire to dive in the Gulf and spend time on the beaches is not threatened. This action by the T&LIC and his regime is morally reprehensible, legally unsupportable, and totally unconstitutional. But, I guess, for you, those wimpy repukegans, the regime of the T&LIC, and the despotcRATs, the Constitutional limitations on government aren’t valid or important when there is an emergency and a disaster. Besides, we should "[n]ever let a serious crisis go to waste. . . . [because] it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before." It gives the T&LIC the "opportunity" to do things like forcing a private company to divest itself of all of its profits for a year by intimidating and threatening its officers. Wait, . . . isn't that what happened to the financial institutions who were forced to accept TARP money. Oh, wait, . . . isn't that what happened to Chrysler and GM when they were taken over by the regime. The government is the root cause of this whole disaster because of it regulations and its cow-towing to the extremist environmentalists. You are wrong, Schnitt! Where and when will the rule of bullying end? Will radio stations be next to be strong-armed by the regime? You need to put your emotions aside and base your assessment on the facts and the rule of law. If this action by the regime continues and no one steps up to stop it, our Nation is doomed to become a dictatorship under the T&LIC and his regime.

When we are afraid of our government, instead of our government being afraid of us, we are in serious trouble as a republic. (By the way, the USA was set up as a REPUBLIC, and not a democracy. The Founding Fathers abhorred a democratic government, because they knew it was nothing more than mob rule.) I would suggest that you seriously consider the long-term consequences of the position you are taking in this matter. It is unfortunate, because a lot of people are being hurt. But, we have laws and courts to deal with it. It is not within the authority of the president to take these kinds of actions. It is the president’s responsibility to enforce the existing laws; it is not his prerogative to make it up as he goes. He does not have the constitutional right or authority to usurp the power and authority of the legislature or the courts. You either support the Constitution and the rule of law or you don’t. We either abide by the rule of law and the Constitution all of the time and in all circumstances, or we allow tyranny to exist. In this case, you are not supporting the rule of law or the Constitution. You cannot have it both ways. I am disappointed in your misguided, emotionally-driven position in this matter.

God Bless you.
God Bless the BSA.
God Bless our Troops.
God Bless America (the greatest country that has ever existed in the history of man).

Patriot Mark

Profiling is Good

I was watching an episode of "The Good Wife" a couple weeks ago. One of the story lines involved a law suit brought against a newspaper for contributing to the death of one of the paper’s staff in a bombing of the newspaper building. The bombing was allegedly the work of Muslims upset about the paper having published a political cartoon depicting Mohammed going through an airport security screening. While the defense firm was working on the newspaper's defense, the firm’s investigator was asked to look into the backgrounds of all the employees who might be middle eastern and/or Muslim. The investigator made a comment complaining about having to engage in racial profiling.

I am sick and tired of the race card being played in these circumstances. I have been a practicing lawyer and litigator for 28 years. I spent about 12 of those years doing criminal defense work. So, I am very sensitive to and adamant about protecting individual civil rights. I was on the front line for many years defending the Constitutional rights of my clients against the overwhelming resources of the state. I was always (and still am) suspicious of law enforcement. They are human and are subject to the same imperfections, motivations, and weaknesses as the rest of us. Unfortunately, I have come into contact with some bad apples in my career. On the other hand, the vast majority of them are fine professionals who are trying to do a very difficult and dangerous job. Yet, as in any walk of life, there are bad ones.

The complaint about racial profiling is political corruption run amuck. In my opinion, the people screaming the loudest about it are the biggest racists. And because these racists scream so loud and their voices are amplified by the liberal media, the rest of us are intimidated and fearful of speaking the truth. The truth is that there is no racial profiling when law enforcement does its job properly. It is because these politically correct loud mouths scream so loudly and have intimidated so many people with their willing accomplices in the liberal media that law enforcement’s job is made more difficult and our safety and security are jeopardized. Profiling is a standard law enforcement and criminal justice technique. Let me give you an example.

A burglary is committed in a home, at night. This is a very serious felony in my state. The owner is threatened with a hand gun and beat up by the burglar. The burglar makes off with money, jewelry and electronics. Law enforcement is called to the house. The first thing they ask the victim to do is to describe the burglar. So, let’s say that the victim describes the burglar as a black man, about 6 feet tall, with a moustache, and driving a dark sedan. A sketch is made based upon the description of the victim, and it is circulated throughout the city. A BOLO (be on the look out) or APB (all points bulletin) is broadcast and disseminated by law enforcement. Now, the description given by the victim is broadcast by the newspapers, TV and radio stations. The sketch is shown on the TV and printed in the newspaper. In the world of political correctness, the liberal loud mouths would be screaming racial profiling. Why? The suspect is a black man, and describing him as such is racist.

Once the description of the suspect is disseminated, law enforcement begins looking for a person that matches the victim’s description of the burglary suspect. Law enforcement officers begin stopping and questioning individuals that match the description given by the victim. According to the liberal loud mouths, law enforcement is now engaging in racial profiling, because the only individuals they are stopping to question are black men, with moustaches, about 6 feet tall, driving dark sedans. If law enforcement were being politically correct, they would not limit their questioning to black men. Instead, they would be stopping 70-year old Hispanic grandmothers and interrogating them about the burglary. Or, maybe, to appease the liberal loud mouths, they stop white clean-shaven males who are 5’6" feet tall and riding motorcycles for questioning. What sense does stopping and questioning people who do not match the profile make? It is a total waste of time, effort and resources to stop and question people who do not fit the profile. In the world of political correctnes, law enforcement does stop and question those who do not fit the description, because they are afraid of offending the liberal loud mouths, or are afraid of being investigated and sued for trumped up civil rights violations.

So, if the 9-11 hijackers were all middle eastern males between the ages of 25 and 34, why are white grandmothers being stopped and searched more thoroughly? How can one be a racist and a bigot when looking at people who match the description of the bad guy? The answer is simple: political correctness. Unfortunately, this political correctness will be the death of many of us and of our nation if it continues unchecked.

God Bless you. God Bless our Troops. God Bless the BSA. God Bless America.
Patriot Mark