Talk about a leap. We're all familiar with the shared belief of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Rahm Emanuel that a crisis should never be allowed to go to waste. We saw that play out recently, when the Obama administration decided to exploit the BP oil rig explosion by having president teleprompter resurrect the mantra of calling for Cap and Trade legislation as a means to help the country move toward green energy - yeah, we also know it's a big scam but at least the logic was apparent. Exploiting the disaster in such a way seemed like a natural fit in the liberal mind.
Now, thanks to a piece by the Prowler in the American Spectator, the BP crisis may end up being used to help the FCC implement internet regulation:
The commission's chairman, Julius Genachowski, and his staff have insisted that imposing federal regulations originally written in the 1930s for the telephone is the only way the Obama Administration can gain the "kind of oversight and control that we need," says an FCC staffer with ties to another Democrat commissioner. "Look at the Gulf oil spill, that's what happens when we let corporations just do their own thing without any accountability. We can't allow that to happen with the Internet. We won't allow it."
Hang on. Let's work through this argument for a minute. The BP explosion occurred on a rig that was drilling 5000 ft. under the Gulf of Mexico. Has anyone asked why they are doing that? The answer is government regulations brought on by the Eco-wackos. The premise of this unnamed staffer is simply faulty - completely so. The premise is that because BP is allowed to operate without restriction, they got careless and caused this entire disaster all by themselves.
Uh, perhaps this staffer should probe into the reasons why BP is drilling so far out from shore. In fact, the argument could be made, quite logically, that the this disaster is as big and far reaching as it is because the government interfered and placed insane restrictions on oil drilling in the Gulf.
If there was a hypocrite of the millennium award, a man named Anthony Stevens-Arroyo would definitely be a frontrunner. Arroyo writes on things Catholic for the Washington Post. On June 16th, he calls for Catholic bishops to deny communion to anyone associated with passage of Arizona's Immigration bill - SB 1070 - as well as those who enforce it. Arroyo specifically singles out Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio as a Catholic who should be denied communion.
Will any of today's bishops deny communion to Catholic officials who vote for this bill and its spawn of imitators in other states? Has censure been voiced against the local sheriff Joe Arpaio (a Catholic) who has led raids on Latinos? These are strategies used in the past by bishops.
Bishop Olmstead of Phoenix, has been forthright in signing documents detailing the Church's objections to this new law, but he has been criticized for not treating this issue with the same vigor as other public matters counter to Church teaching.
Now for the hypocrisy that is so thick, you'd have to sharpen the teeth on the chainsaw used to attempt to cut through it. Notice how Arroyo's reason for going after Arpaio is what he perceives as an immoral law - just prior to singling out Arpaio, Arroyo primes the pump by comparing immigration enforcement to Gestapo tactics.
In the interest of determining if Arroyo is consistent in his views that following what he believes to be an immoral law is reason enough to be refused communion, I decided to see what his take was on Nancy Pelosi receiving communion despite being pro-abortion. It turns out that we don't have to go back all that far - less than a year. Let's take a look at Arroyo's words from December 8th, 2009:
Michael Sean Winters rails against Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, telling all that she is "not pro-life." He sets himself up as judge and executioner of a Catholic woman who honors her role to uphold the law of the land that allows choice about abortion. (Does "pro-life" mean that one must be a subversive advocating civil disobedience?)
Ah, so in the case of Nancy Pelosi, the morality or immorality of the law is not at issue; Simply following it absolves her from any form of censure. Pelosi is allowed to be pro-abortion because the law prevents her from being culpable. However, Joe Arpaio isn't afforded the same luxury. He isn't even responsible for passing laws - unlike Pelosi. Yet, he should be denied communion for following one Arroyo doesn't like. Conversely, Pelosi should be allowed to continue receiving communion because she's just following laws he does like.
That may sound a bit confusing so let's just break it down to the truth that Arroyo isn't telling you. The truth is that Arroyo is pro-abortion and pro-illegal amnesty. As such, he will make any argument, regardless of hypocrisy or inconsistency to push his agenda. Perhaps Mr. Arroyo should check out his local confessional. Unlike communion, no one's banned from that.
Watch Arpaio's response to Arroyo's wish - via Fox 10 in Phoenix:
I've always liked Trace Adkins' music but I think I like it a whole lot more after watching this interview. CNN's Anderson Cooper does a very decent job in this interview, asking Adkins some good questions. Before watching this, I had no idea that the now famous country singer worked in the oil fields for four years and on rigs in the Gulf of Mexico for six years. That unquestionably makes him qualified to speak on the subject - unlike typical celebrities, who do it anyway.
This whole segment is worth watching but hang in there until Cooper asks Adkins for his opinion on Barack Obama's offshore drilling moratorium. Some of the words used are "Idiotic", "Juvenile", and "uninformed" - all after rolling his eyes in obvious disgust at Obama. He then goes on to say that the moratorium is like "kicking a man when he's down". Adkins' point is a very good one.
Yes, fishing and tourism are livelihoods for many on the Gulf Coast but so is oil drilling. Demonstrating how supply side economics works, Adkins then points to all of the industries that will be negatively impacted by this insane decision. Either Obama hasn't thought about them or he simply doesn't care.
Also note at the end of the interview, Cooper asks Adkins about which one of his songs would best fit the oil disaster. Adkins response is the song, "Missing You". A link to a video of that song is below the Anderson Cooper interview.
