Comments on: Supreme Court To Hear Exxon Valdez Case

19 Years After Worst Oil Spill In U.S. History, Alaskans Will Find Out If Company Pays Damages

[easeup-2009]

Posted by mjlewis6 at 01:14 PM : Feb 26, 2008

What''s bad policy is letting these oil conglomerates merge together & reduce competition, which keeps prices up and lessens the need for innovation.

[antoniof123]

Just remember, after November our country will be under new management. (Hold that thought, Scallia).

Posted by nikosk1 at 08:01 AM : Feb 26, 2008

You are correct but the sad part is you still need 2/3 majorities to remove anyone. Unless you can hold a monkey trail and send them to prison.

Oh wait the GOP did that with the ex-governor from Alabama. Don''t worry GOP we may have that 2/3 majority soon if you keep up the good work.

[killtheliars]

I would recommend that anyone in alaska who does not get what they were origianlly promised go and damage Exxon property. We have seen how effective blowing up a pipeline can be. If your govt'' won''t fight for you you have to fight yourself

[jwind11]

You idiotic leftist sheep. All you can do is find some way to blame everything on Bush. Well, guess what. This has nothing to do with Bush. Sorry to burst your bubble but its the truth. You can make all these ridiculous claims about the Supreme Court being paid off, feeling beholden to Bush etc., but its all smoke and you dam well know it. I sure don''''t see any Democrats standing up and pressing the issue forward. Why are they so silent? One day you will wake up(hopefully after you have matured a bit) and realize that all the time you spent bashing Bush for things he has no hand in at all was simply that much of your life you wasted. Way to go losers!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by crusherking at 12:17 PM : Feb 26, 2008

couldnt have said it better myself.....tired of the liberals "victim" attitude....gets them no where in life.

[antoniof123]

Are you so narrow-minded that you think Supreme Court justices are at the beck & call of the President who nominated them? These people are called "conservative" or "liberal" for their SOCIAL ideologies (i.e. abortion, civil rights, etc.) NOT because they are owned by the President.

Posted by easeup at 10:45 AM : Feb 26, 2008

Your mistake is they are chosen by the President because they hold his political belief and if that belief is one that business should not pay for any damages then that is why they got chosen.

But the good will be that the people in Alaska may move away from the wacko conservatives they helped put into office. Too bad it takes destruction of their enviornment for them to see it.

[antoniof123]

I don''t want to hear the crying from these people in Alaska they voted for the ones that run the court you know the ones appointed by dumbo.

[ricknuber]

Oh, good...mbcsmith is up from her nap. Ready to throw your first cursing, incoherent tantrum of the day?

[mbcsmith]

I wonder how many posters here buy gas from Exxon or one of their distributors.

[jlbear60]

Looks like the oil compnay gets away with murder again, they have this country in the hole and they have congress/senate/courst in their pockets. They will never own up to the strangle hold they have because it''s all baout money, it the governmnet wasn''t in their pockets, the oil companies won''t be running this country in to the hole. STOP THE OIL/GAS companies and this country would be safe and the average American would have money in the banks too.
So until we stop the oil/gas companies and the insurance companies, we as Americans will never be free from debt.

[mbcsmith]

"I doubt that a justice who was appointed by Bush was appointed for any other reason then their slavish loyalty to Bush/Cheney."

Posted by RickNuber at 11:41 AM : Feb 26, 2008"

j-witless by any other name is still witless.