It this the Presdent of the United States of America extorting money from BP or has Hugo Chavez taken over? Mark Levin says it all the time, we're living in a soft tyranny now and it's not getting better.
This BP deal is one more example. Honestly it's a little bit depressing that nobody in congress is calling him out on this. Where are the republican leaders?
AMERICAN THINKER
13 comments:
Well, Rep. Barton said something about it, called it a "shake down" and a "tragedy." I believe Rep. Michelle "batshit crazy" Bachman said about the same thing. I personally wish all republicans would defend BP as noisily as possible but most of them, whatever they might think personally, are too smart politically to go to the wall for BP.
$20 billion is just a down-payment, obviously it's goint to cost a lot more than that.
Oh, and Mark Levin is a raving lunatic (or at least he plays one on the radio).
You are right that its politically stupid to defend BP but it was a shakedown and it was illegal.
...but good job Obama, you cant plug the leak so you do the liberal thing.... ask for someone elses money.
One termer.
...and btw Rhino excellent article. I knew it would be on point before even reading it when the typ lib response an ad hominem attack about Bachmann and Levin being crazy without refuting one single point.
I love it when I see Republicans nakedly revealing themselves as the party of the wealthy and the big corporations.If they keep that up they may even lose the tea party crowd. I'm not clear how the President persuading BP to establish a fund for cleanup is somehow extortion. I would call it him doing his job on behalf of the American people.
\
As to Obama being a one-term President, would you care to make a wager?
I actually don't have a problem with the president making sure BP bucks up on this one. I'm leary of the gov't holding the kitty, though. I do wonder why this administration is OK with letting BP fail when GM and the banks were "too big to fail". Sounds hypocritical.
At any point did BP say that they wouldnt "buck up on this one" You sound like a lib and its a silly strawman argument. Just bcuz we expect our President to uphold the law of the US Constitution does not mean we are in bed with BP and want them to slide on this one. Fuck BP says I, but fuck the liberals who think that the solution to every problem is a money grab.
Well let's see, our last President violated the Constitution on a regular basis and not a peep from you. He bragged about illegal wiretaps. Now we have a Democratic President who persuades BP, in an entirely legal fasion, to put up a down-payment on a clean-up and compensation fund, for the worst environmental disaster in our history, and you are up in arms.
Bush isnt President, let it go man.
The RULE OF LAW is the only thing I am defending.
Why extort money from BP? There are laws set up to protect the victims of this tragedy. The story that nobody seems to be reporting is that BP has already payed out THOUSANDS of legitimate claims and didn't back away from anything.
Add to this the disinsentive for investment in the U.S.
If I'm a foriegn company why would I invest in the U.S. when I know the government doesn't respect the rule of law and could extort money from me if there's an accident?
At the very least i'm sure all the other drillers in the Gulf are currently setting up plans to get their money out of the U.S. immediately if they have any problems in the future.
I could go on and on with all the negative aspects of this but i don't have the time.
All I can say is i'm not surprised that gary can't think this deep but i'm disappointed in you getlive.
Your newfound concern for the rule of law is touching.
Good to see that your argument style hasnt changed.
...you still dont have one.
Well besides blaming Bush, ignoring the article linked, and making ad hominem attacks.
Hows that working out for you...
of course gary you don't have a fact based argument here. you don't even disagree with me but try to engage me in an argument of your choosing.
Even if you were correct and Bush "trampled all over the constitution" that still exposes you for the hack and hypocrite that you are.
If you disagree with me that Obama is usurping the constitution then where is your argument against that assertion?
Your silence in that area leads me to believe that you do in fact agree with me which means you should be arguing WITH The Aurora on this one and yet you aren't.....
Not surprising of course since we have exposed you so many times it's boring now.
You should really just accept the fact that you're not very intelligent and follow our logical lead. Leave the emotional arguments to the women.
Obama uses the persuasive powers of the Presidency to persuade BP to put up $20 billion for a cleanup and compensation fund. Agree or disagree but how is this unconstitutional? How exactly is Obama trampling on the Constitution. Illegalwiretaps violated the fourth amendment. Torture violated the UN Convention on Torture, a treaty that is the "supreme law of the land" according to the constitution. What part of the Constitution is Obama violating? It's called a question.
Post a Comment