Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-18-2010, 07:18 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
25,826 posts, read 20,698,449 times
Reputation: 14818

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Because they are against anything Obama does, even this fund that makes logical sense. Between Palin, Barton and Bachmann they are creating some great campaign slogans for the November elections. The retraction and the defense, he was taken out of context, etc are absolutely hysterical. The republican leadership was on the phone with Barton within seconds after making his statement, one of the quickest retractions on record.

This is the problem with both parties, instead of working towards solutions they can only offer criticism even where they should both be on the same page.
My absolutely favorite excuse from the GOBP (thanks Keith) - 'out of context' when he was on virtually every news channel live for all to see and hear.
They really count on people being stupid, don't they?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2010, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,963 posts, read 22,143,591 times
Reputation: 13799
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Cute. When is he leaving? I will help him pack.
First off, his quote did not let BP off the hook"

"I apologize. I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, is subject to some sort of political pressure that is, again, in my words — amounts to a shakedown, so I apologize."

I know how the left adores tyrants, but the United States is not a thugocracy, we are nation of laws and justice.

The president has a lot of power, he has the media cameras whenever he wants. With his power as the president, he can pick any private individual, business or corporation and go on TV and demonize them to destroy their credibility, sink their stocks and drive them into bankruptcy. He also has the power to threaten any individual, company or corporation to agree to perform some task, make some public statement or fork over $20 billion, or else he will destroy them.

Is this want we want in a president, any time he has a personal grudge or disagreement with an individual, business or corporation, that he derides them publicly, going so far as too summon them to the white house and seemingly coerce and threaten them into doing something against their will, out of fear that they will be the next to be financially ruined or see their reputation destroyed?

We have laws and regulations, and if someone violated these, then we take them to court and hold legally liable.

I want BP to compensate us for the clean up and damage they have caused, but I do not want a thug for a president.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 08:35 AM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,146,264 times
Reputation: 5941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
First off, his quote did not let BP off the hook"

"I apologize. I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, is subject to some sort of political pressure that is, again, in my words — amounts to a shakedown, so I apologize."

I know how the left adores tyrants, but the United States is not a thugocracy, we are nation of laws and justice.""""







Corporations AREN'T tyrants!!!???Boy...you've missed a lot...






""The president has a lot of power, he has the media cameras whenever he wants. With his power as the president, he can pick any private individual, business or corporation and go on TV and demonize them to destroy their credibility, sink their stocks and drive them into bankruptcy. He also has the power to threaten any individual, company or corporation to agree to perform some task, make some public statement or fork over $20 billion, or else he will destroy them.""""



Kinda goes against your fellow repugs who swear Obama is weak.





Is this want we want in a president, any time he has a personal grudge or disagreement with an individual, business or corporation,"""



Killing 11 people, destroying our southern coast and the livelihood of Americans on it.......YOU reduce that to a personal grudge" or "disagreement" ?? ONLY a Repug could do that.




"""that he derides them publicly, going so far as too summon them to the white house and seemingly coerce and threaten them into doing something against their will, out of fear that they will be the next to be financially ruined or see their reputation destroyed?"""

Ya, an oil company financially ruined?

A. They sell OIL.

B. If they sell oil and fail....they DESERVE to fail.....almost nobody could be THAT stupid.





"""We have laws and regulations,""



Which BP overrode







"""and if someone violated these, then we take them to court and hold legally liable."""


Take them to court and wait 30 years for a resolution....the coast and it's people don't HAVE YEARS, they need help NOW! DUH!






I want BP to compensate us for the clean up and damage they have caused, but I do not want a thug for a president.
So Obama should do nothing and wait for BP to kindly hand out checks.......dream on......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 08:48 AM
 
27,624 posts, read 21,120,803 times
Reputation: 11095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
So Obama should do nothing and wait for BP to kindly hand out checks.......dream on......
They are ever so indignant about Obama helping the Gulf Coast victims and their families. I was under the impression tha these people were U.S. citizens and not illegal immigrants. I suppose Rush Limbore told them to react this way, so they will tow the line and not question insane right wing authority. If Obama did not demand restitution they would be up in arms about how he is not helping Americans. Anyway, he is doing away with years of long litigation that would have ensued if BP was not held accountable now.

Last edited by sickofnyc; 06-18-2010 at 09:28 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 08:58 AM
JPD
 
12,138 posts, read 18,292,503 times
Reputation: 8004
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Source:

Why are the Republican's so angry about BP's efforts to pay the Gulf Coast victims?
I don't know, but it's a great strategy heading towards a major election, so they should milk it for all it's worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,963 posts, read 22,143,591 times
Reputation: 13799
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
They are ever so indignant about Obama helping the Gulf Coast victims and their families. I was under the impression tha these people were U.S. citizens and not illegal immigrants. I suppose Rush Limbore told them to react this way, so they will tow the line and not question insane right wing authority. I Obama did not demand restitution they would be up in arms about how he is not helping Americans. Anyway, he is doing away with years of long litigation that would have ensued if BP was not held accountable now.
So what you are saying is that our laws and/or regulations are insufficient. Fine, then lets amend them, and make them proper.

The law already say BP is legally responsible to compensate everyone who adversely affected by the oil discharge and to pay all costs associated with the clean up. If the current law is not specific enough, then let's change it.

This president has been acting like a thug from the start, with talk like "We have our boot on BP's neck" 0bama has been destroying BPs stock, and now this coercive action looks more like blackmail then simply engaging in discussions over how best to proceed, its thuggish.

Do i want BP to make prompt compensation to the people affected by this oil, hell yes. But I do not want our president and our congress to be acting like a bunch of foul mouthed, strong armed mafia thugs either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 09:07 AM
JPD
 
12,138 posts, read 18,292,503 times
Reputation: 8004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post

This president has been acting like a thug from the start, with talk like "We have our boot on BP's neck" 0bama has been destroying BPs stock, and now this coercive action, its thuggish.

Please provide a link that supports the bold portion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 09:09 AM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,692,498 times
Reputation: 5132
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
They are ever so indignant about Obama helping the Gulf Coast victims and their families. I was under the impression tha these people were U.S. citizens and not illegal immigrants. I suppose Rush Limbore told them to react this way, so they will tow the line and not question insane right wing authority. I Obama did not demand restitution they would be up in arms about how he is not helping Americans. Anyway, he is doing away with years of long litigation that would have ensued if BP was not held accountable now.
Obama did not have to "demand" restitution. He was posturing.

BP always said they would pay for cleanup, and for legitimate claims from residents. You can bet there will be plenty of opportunists (yes, legal US citizens are often opportunists) who will put in illegitimate claims. I don't blame the company for not wanting to stand on the corner passing out money to everyone.

I think a fine point is being missed in this, and that is the way that Obama handled this - he "derides them publicly, going so far as too summon them to the white house and seemingly coerce and threaten them into doing something" that they were going to do anyway. (Good choice of words, Wapasha). Much like the way Republicans threatened and coerced Barton to retract (what he legitimately had a right to say). Politicians are such nasty people, and politics is a dirty business.

As for this exchange:
We have laws and regulations,
Which BP overrode

Let me point out this: Which the government inspectors ignored, preferring to play video games and watch porn instead of doing the job they were paid to do. Should they help pay restitution to the residents of the Gulf? Should the Federal Government share the responsibility? Remember all those windfall profits taxes they collected from the oil industry?
How about putting that into escrow too, and how about Obama returning is campaign contribution from BP by adding it to the escrow fund? Maybe he should think about how he looks to the rest of the world while he's posturing with his boot on the neck of a private company.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,963 posts, read 22,143,591 times
Reputation: 13799
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPD View Post
Please provide a link that supports the bold portion.
Provide a link? Give me a break. When the most powerful man in the world has been publicly trashing BP, claiming to have his boot on their neck, sending an army of DoJ lawyers to prosecute BP, demanding that they suspend paying dividends, and he keeps hammering away at them day after day, why would you think it has no effect.

People are speculating on BP going bankrupt after 0bama is done destroying them, I do not need a link to see that what the president has been saying and doing is having adverse affects on BPs stock.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2010, 09:19 AM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,040,586 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post

The law already say BP is legally responsible to compensate everyone who adversely affected by the oil discharge and to pay all costs associated with the clean up. If the current law is not specific enough, then let's change it.
BP under current law would have its liability capped at $75 million. To amend that amount upward would in all likelihood would be considered ex post facto and as such unconstitutional.

Quote:
0bama has been destroying BPs stock,
Outside of being patently absurd, it is patently absurd.

Quote:
Do i want BP to make prompt compensation to the people affected by this oil, hell yes.
I want to believe in the tooth fairy as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top