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.
As frustration grows over the mounting oil spill disaster, there is an odd bit of political cognitive dissonance coming out of some quarters: some conservatives are suggesting that the federal government take over BP and clean up the oil spill. Aren’t conservatives opposed to government takeovers of private business?
On Face the Nation yesterday, Sen. Lamar Alexander raised the idea
Should the Government take over a healthy oil company?
I have to defend Alexander who I find a repulsive {R} but he said nothing of the sort and your thread is misleading.In no way did he talk about the gvt taking over BP.He did mention that the POTUS could take over the supervision of the spill.Taking over a company and supervising a oil spill are two different things,don't you think?
I have to defend Alexander who I find a repulsive {R} but he said nothing of the sort and your thread is misleading.In no way did he talk about the gvt taking over BP.He did mention that the POTUS could take over the supervision of the spill.Taking over a company and supervising a oil spill are two different things,don't you think?
1. Should the government take over a private oil company? No
2. Does Obama want to take over a private oil company? Yes. Some say that is gross dereliction of duty and permitting the oil spill to expand is an effort to create the situation in which take over of private oil companies would be justified. Remember "never lose the opportunity to exploit a crisis"?
3. Should the government take over or assist capping the spill? If they have the means and expertise to do so- yes. The platform is on federal property. If they do not have the means or expertise to do so- no.
4. Should they have initiated containment of the spill? Yes. Did they? No.
The only way for anything to work out in the long term is for BP to become nationalized. The US arm of BP ( AMOCO) needs to separated and become USAMACO. Our first national oil company. The long term liability, security and protection of our Environment depends on the People , not some British oil company who has invaded our shoreline and our Gulf Of Mexico.
I see no way out for Obama, he has bought this oil spill already, on his watch. BP will drag out the pay offs, law suits, for many years. It would be good for BP and for the people of the Gulf, if the Government took control totally.
Is your whole defense based on one word spoken by Alexander?When asked by Schaefer "do you think the gvt should take over BP"? Alexander said sure but he went right into talking about taking over the supervision of the spill.
In no shape or form did he insinuate a gvt take over of the whole company.
Even the article that you posted the writer in fairness went to the act that gives the POTUS the authority to take control of a disaster that Alexander was referring to :
Quote:
With each criticism of BP and the federal government’s inability to force the company to move faster when oil is spotted coming ashore, local officials have started to clamor for President Barack Obama to federalize the disaster response under the Oil Pollution Act.
Anyone with slight common sense would not grip onto the one word sure and build a case when the rest of the evidence points otherwise.
Is your whole defense based on one word spoken by Alexander?When asked by Schaefer "do you think the gvt should take over BP"? Alexander said sure but he went right into talking about taking over the supervision of the spill.
In no shape or form did he insinuate a gvt take over of the whole company.
Even the article that you posted the writer in fairness went to the act that gives the POTUS the authority to take control of a disaster that Alexander was referring to :
Anyone with slight common sense would not grip onto the one word sure and build a case when the rest of the evidence points otherwise.
So you're claiming to be devoid of "slight common sense"....so noted.
Is your whole defense based on one word spoken by Alexander?When asked by Schaefer "do you think the gvt should take over BP"? Alexander said sure but he went right into talking about taking over the supervision of the spill.
In no shape or form did he insinuate a gvt take over of the whole company.
Even the article that you posted the writer in fairness went to the act that gives the POTUS the authority to take control of a disaster that Alexander was referring to :
Anyone with slight common sense would not grip onto the one word sure and build a case when the rest of the evidence points otherwise.
People tend to create something out of nothing. If the government takes over BP, it would not be the US government but the British government.
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.
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.
uh huh...
