How George Bush, Joe Barton, Dick Cheney and Tom DeLay Caused the Gulf Oil Spill and Made Sure BP Will Never Be Held Accountable

agree completely, the previous admin was about one thing, wealth redistribution... to the wealthy.

Agent 57

Now this Administration is giving wealth to people that havnt earned it from the middle class. So there hasnt been a change at all.

Sure, David, but even if that's true, that kind of giveaway doesn't result in the killing off of our world's oceans...

your right, it produces slaves. Its a matter of perception I guess.

ABSOLUTELY David. Earn your keep. Work hard and reap the benefits.

Now this Administration is giving wealth to people that havnt earned it from the middle class.

How?

This is the biggest BS farce talking point going. Literally have to be brain-dead to believe $hit like this.

How's the Kool-aid Dave?

Jerryf11 - you have heard of the health care reform bill haven't you? Explain to me how that doesn't give wealth to people that haven't earned it... It's OK, I'll be waiting.

Jerryf11 - you have heard of the health care reform bill haven't you? Explain to me how that doesn't give wealth to people that haven't earned it... It's OK, I'll be waiting.

Prove to me it DOES. I'll be waiting, thanks. You know, innocent until proven guilty.

Hows it BS? Please describe....

Really? Are you serious?

How else could it be described besides as massive redistribution of wealth? You call it mal-distribution just like the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus did.

"This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America. The last couple three years, the mal-distribution of income in American is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy and the middle income class is left behind."

http://newledger.com/2010/03/redistribution-of-wealth-and-the-shaping-of-a-new-america-the-real-goals-of-health-care-reform/

Business Insider breaks down the revenue to pay for the abomination here http://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-the-healthcare-bill-is-a-gigantic-wealth-redistribution-scheme-2010-3

A huge chunk of the revenue comes from payroll taxes on households making over $250,000/year.

If you make a $1 million/year, your taxes go up by about $46,000.

If you're a family of four making over $88,200 (4x the poverty level) there are basically no benefits for you.

If you make $1 million/year your taxes GO UP BY $46,000, that's not all you'll pay, that's just the INCREASE!

The NYT also discusses it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/business/24leonhardt.html

The benefits, meanwhile, flow mostly to households making less than four times the poverty level — $88,200 for a family of four people. Those without insurance in this group will become eligible to receive subsidies or to join Medicaid. (Many of the poor are already covered by Medicaid.) Insurance costs are also likely to drop for higher-income workers at small companies.

Even the NYT says that it is redistribution of wealth..."Those without insurance in this group will become eligible to receive subsidies or to join Medicaid."

Where does the money come from to fund government subsidies Jerry?

Yes, I am passionate about this. Why? My taxes. I'm not going to tell you how much my taxes go up; but I will say that it's a hell of a lot more than $46,000!

The middle class is working their butts off to survive and are still being hammered by the recession. On the other hand, the top 25 hedge fund managers on Wall Street made $1 billion on the average each in 2009. Their job description? Lying their butts off to scam people on derivatives, bankrupt the nation, get obscene salaries and bonuses, bank offshore to avoid taxes and live in several mansions and vacation mansions. Let's call them what they are - hedge hog fund managers.

I agree with you mountainmike, but that doesn't change anything in my argument or my point.

Good comment, Jimster. Note that none of this fits with the notion of free markets; Cheney was interfering with the free market. Pure crony capitalism, one oil man scratching the backs of all the others.

but that doesn't change anything in my argument or my point.

Yes, narrow-mindedness at its finest.

The simple fact of the matter this country has already seen the greatest wealth redistribution in the history of mankind over the last 30 years, starting with that actor instituting trickle-down economic policies.

The middle class has been the sole funder of the tax breaks for the wealthy and corporate welfare for decades. Where the hell have you been?

Take for instance capital gains. I consider a capital gain to be income. There are many very wealthy people for whom this is their sole or primary source of income. They pay half in taxes, or less, than the rest of us working stiffs. So I am going to complain when the rich elite have to pay increased taxes to subsidize healthcare for the working poor? Are you Fing serious? What planet are you from?

Aside from that, the mandate is to buy PRIVATE health insurance to begin with, so you don't have to worry your little head about big govt, this is just another Fing corporate giveaway, thanks due largely to Obama not having enough sack and being too much of a pragmatist, and the GOP deciding it is better for people to die due to lack of healthcare insurance than for the rich to bother to help lift all boats, especially considering we live in a SOCIETY, and no one single man or woman is SOLELY responsible for their own wealth, but instead is only possible when things such as a labor pool, consumers, infrastructure, security, emergency services, etc exist.

So please, go cry me another Fing river over taxes for the rich going up. The top 20% controls 93% of the wealth but doesn't pay near that in taxes. And to top it off, these schmucks are running fronts in the Cayman Islands or dumping money in Swiss banks to avoid their fare share, all so YOUR taxes and my taxes increase, or we do what we have decided to do as a nation, BORROW, and make sure our govt is completely Fing broke by the time my daughter is my age. And why? All so people like you can hoard over your money.

Good for you.

I've learned in this world that a vast majority of us will never get something for nothing. Yet, we want a military, to fight two wars, educate our children, makes sure our elderly get medical care, create and maintain our infrastructure to promote commerce, protect our citizens, etc etc etc, but some can do nothing but b!tch about their taxes.

I am so Fing sick of it.

Yes, I am passionate about this. Why? My taxes. I'm not going to tell you how much my taxes go up; but I will say that it's a hell of a lot more than $46,000!

Good for you. I am so sorry that your taxes are going up. Really, working families having their homes foreclosed on, losing their jobs, making decisions between paying medical bills and the mortgage, filing bankruptcy to pay medical bills, raises not keeping up with inflation, jobs outsourced so dbag execs can rake in more cash, but the best you can do is b!tch about having your taxes raised by less than 5%?

First of all, if you do really earn a seven or eight figure income (which I doubt, because why the hell would you waste your time on this thread), you should realize your tax rate is at near historic lows. Secondly, you people have told all of us peons "if you lower our taxes, we'll create jobs and the wealth will 'trickle down'". Guess that was a load of $hit huh?

The results instead has been corporate bail-outs, huge govt debts, stagnant middle class wages, and oh yeah, the largest wealth redistribution in human history with the obscene wealth concentration to the top earners in this nation.

So boo hoo, go cry in your mansion or your BMW. Meanwhile, for the working middle class like me that helps you make your millions, the best you can tell us is "F you, I am rich, I don't give a F$%k about you, I only care about that 4.6% tax increase and wondering how much more I can dump in my child's trust fund or what other piece of opulent over-priced crap that I can buy from Needless Markups".

I have no sympathy for you whatsoever.

But here's the sad part, I don't begrudge your wealth. I just hate your attitude like you are the sole provider of the lot in life that you have. I would guess you have a great many people to thank that have aided in your success, but all you have for them in return is a big middle finger.

How kind.

Good for you Jerry! Well said.

First of all, if you do really earn a seven or eight figure income (which I doubt, because why the hell would you waste your time on this thread),

Believe whatever you want.

you should realize your tax rate is at near historic lows.

I do, but I'll bet they won't be for long.

Secondly, you people have told all of us peons "if you lower our taxes, we'll create jobs and the wealth will 'trickle down'". Guess that was a load of $hit huh?

I create hundreds of jobs in my local community. My employees get 2 weeks (last year they got 1 week) of paid time off to donate their time to the charity of their choice, I donate my time, my money back into my community. I support homeless shelters, drug and alcohol rehabs, our local food pantry, banquet, and on and on. I probably donate more money to charity in one year than most of the people here make in 10 years.

The results instead has been corporate bail-outs, huge govt debts,

I am against corporate bail-outs and huge government debts. Was against them under Pres. Bush am still against them under Pres. Obama.

stagnant middle class wages, and oh yeah, the largest wealth redistribution in human history with the obscene wealth concentration to the top earners in this nation.

I treat my employees very, very well.

So boo hoo, go cry in your mansion or your BMW. Meanwhile, for the working middle class like me that helps you make your millions, the best you can tell us is "F you, I am rich, I don't give a F$%k about you, I only care about that 4.6% tax increase and wondering how much more I can dump in my child's trust fund or what other piece of opulent over-priced crap that I can buy from Needless Markups".

I don't have a mansion. My home in is 4,000 square feet total for the main level and basement. I did splurge a bit and put in a 4 car garage. That's by no means a mansion. Some of my employees have nicer, bigger homes than I do. I also drive a 2000 Ford truck, not a BMW. My wife drives a 2005 Cadillac Escalade, and I barely bought that for her because it was so expensive and it was used when I bought it.

I enjoy giving money to other people, charities, my community, etc. But I don't like being told by the end of a gun that I have to pay more money to buy somebody else health care insurance.

What's Needless Markups?

But here's the sad part, I don't begrudge your wealth. I just hate your attitude like you are the sole provider of the lot in life that you have. I would guess you have a great many people to thank that have aided in your success, but all you have for them in return is a big middle finger.

See that's where you are wrong. You are making this grand assumption that I don't care or that I think I am successful without help from other people. You don't even know me, my business, or anything about me. You are just making assumptions because I said I didn't want to pay more money in taxes!

See that's where you are wrong. You are making this grand assumption that I don't care..........

actually he's not. you yourself said you would lay people off before you would take a hit from taxes... your words...

I am a one of those evil business owning rich Republicans you all seem so fond of. I would be directly affected by these additional taxes. The bottom line is, if they raise my taxes, I'm going to cut my workforce by at least 15-20%. Call me greedy, call me names, I'm not willing to give up or change my family's lifestyle

so based on your words and what you stated above in #2.17 about your frugal lifestyle you have more than enough that your lifestyle would not be affected in the least...

My lifestyle includes donating a lot of money to charities. I'm not going to stop donating money to charities that affect the lives of hundreds or potentially thousands of people.

Dean believes Mr. Bush took advantage of his insider information when he sold his Harken stock in 1990, but he escaped SEC penalties because his father was president and many of the investigating officials had Bush family ties and other conflicts of interest

Just can't make this kind of stuff up MOK...

Of course Dick Cheney and George Bush thought this was perfectly all right and capitalism in the oil business was king. After all Wall Street had the freedom of no regulations why not the oil business also?
The ban on offshore drilling which many opposed due to the dangers of spills was lifted by one George W. Bush while he was in office.

Exactly ! President and Vice President .

#1.6

Only a very few had any idea what they were passing...a very important person (and a few others) in this signing knew exactly.

Oh my...

Barton was born in Waco, Texas to Bess Wynell Buice and Larry Linus Barton.^[1] He graduated from Waco High School. He attended Texas A&M University in College Station on a Gifford-Hill Opportunity Award scholarship^[2] and received a B.S. in industrial engineering in 1972. An M.Sc. in industrial administration from Purdue University followed in 1973. Following college Barton entered private industry until 1981 when he became a White House Fellow and served under Secretary of Energy James B. Edwards.

Later, he began consulting for Atlantic Richfield Oil and Gas Co. before being elected to Congress in 1984.^[3]

Really knew what was what...Good `Old Waco Boy`...

The Waco Siege began on February 28, and ended violently 50 days later on April 19, .... The January 5, 1992 interview of David Koresh by Martin King of ...

How do we present this `Conspiracy` ? That is what it is/was/will be.

jbdaad:

How do we present this `Conspiracy` ? That is what it is/was/will be.

I think that, sadly, unless and until we have a courageous and honest US Attorney General in office (Holder is a coward), we're pretty much stymied.

It's quite likely that most of these criminals will age and die before there is ever any substantive call for their punishment.

And they know it.

upswing

It's very damning to see -- in black and white -- this criminal agenda played out by Cheney and his criminal accessories

Don't forget Cheney's co-conspiritor, Barack Hussein Obama Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm.

It's always interesting to me how something like this can be denigrated by saying "Oh, the conspiracy theorists are at it again." Well, now you can go down the line and find the culpable criminals, from both their voting records and other things, e-mails, cell phone texts. And even now when it can be decidedly proven that Cheney and Bush screwed us yet again, all the conservatives can say is: "Yeah, watch your a&& a little more closely next time, cause we're not gonna stop trying to cheat the American people."

Greg Johnson:

Don't forget Cheney's co-conspiritor, Barack Hussein Obama Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm.

I don't.

Given the opportunity, I'd throw his NeoCon ass in prison, too.

Bush, Cheney and Obama are all cut from the same treasonous, globalist and criminal cloth.

Greg Johnson-900798
Don't forget Cheney's co-conspiritor, Barack Hussein Obama Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm.

deflect, deflect, deflect The right's default defense.

What exactley would you suggest the current Administration do ?

Trying to hold the Obama administration as solely responsible has grown equally tiresome.

What exactley would you suggest the current Administration do ?

Federal officials who oversaw drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted gifts from oil companies, viewed pornography at work and even considered themselves part of industry, the Interior Department inspector general says in a new report (pdf).

The cat is out of the bag. The time for the gooberinment to act has passed. Shoddy oversight on BO's watch.

rolls eyes.

Does anyone know when they started to drill this well?

In September 2009, the rig drilled the deepest oil well in history at a vertical depth of 35,050 ft (10,680 m) and measured depth of 35,055 ft (10,685 m).^[5]

BO was inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

My pleasure!

As a reminder, this disaster occurred while the well was being brought into production; well after GWB left office. To congecture whether this would have happened while GWB was in office is irrelevent; although it probably would have in my guestimate, it is still irrelevent.

Trying to hold the Obama administration as solely responsible has grown equally tiresome.

I am not holding the Obama administration as solely responsible; it does, however have some culpability. To intimate otherwise is letting this administration completely off the hook....wrong no matter who is in office.

#5.2:Trying to hold the Obama administration as solely responsible has grown equally tiresome

Solely responsible for what?

Mary,

Lack of oversight!

Where did this information come from? And is this when it was completed, as in became active??

The article says: In September 2009, the rig drilled the deepest oil well in history at a vertical depth of 35,050 ft (10,680 m) and measured depth of 35,055 ft (10,685 m).^[5]

On October 22, 2007 Randall B. Luthi, Wyoming attorney, Cheney cohort and new director of MMS signed a "Finding of No New Significant Impact" (PDF) with regard to Lease Sale 206, also known as the Deepwater Horizon. This finding was the last barrier for BP to cross before plunging equipment 5000 feet under the ocean's surface, using Halliburton fracture techniques to open the well, and beginning the flow of oil which ends as an environmental and economic disaster to Gulf inhabitants. No significant impact, indeed.

This seems to indicate that the planning, exploration and construction began well before 2009? If so, then it DID NOT begin after Obama took office, but rather when Bush was still President. However, that is incidental to the premise of this article, in that the Bush Administration including Cheney along with Delay and Barton created an environment of de-regulation and allowed foreign oil companies to rob the tax payers!

Then can we agree that the fediurinal gooberinment is a cancer?

that is incidental to the premise of this article, in that the Bush Administration including Cheney along with Delay and Barton created an environment of de-regulation and allowed foreign oil companies to rob the tax payers!

And the current administration has created an environment that....

Federal officials who oversaw drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted gifts from oil companies, viewed pornography at work and even considered themselves part of industry, the Interior Department inspector general says in a new report (pdf).

When will you hold this President culpable for anything??????

"

And the current administration has created an environment that....

Federal officials who oversaw drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted gifts from oil companies, viewed pornography at work and even considered themselves part of industry, the Interior Department inspector general says in a new report (pdf)."

Haaaahahahahaha!! You didn't actually READ that report did you??

" I want to note that all of the conduct chronicled in this report occurred prior2007, and pre-dating your tenure as Secretary and your January 2009 Ethics Guide. While this, it is more evidence that there was, indeed, a much-needed change to the ethical culture ofMMS."

" I want to note that all of the conduct chronicled in this report occurred prior2007, and pre-dating your tenure as Secretary and your January 2009 Ethics Guide. While this, it is more evidence that there was, indeed, a much-needed change to the ethical culture ofMMS."

BO has done exactly what to change that environment prior to this calamity?

Ah, Studiusbagus - being drawn into another bout of verbal Whack-a-Mole I see!

Have you ever been given the reigns of a disfunctional operation of any sort and tasked with straightening it out themman? Even with just taking over a small business it's not the sort of situation where you throw a switch and shazamm, evrything's fixed.

Actually Stand,

I had the unique opportunity to start up and operate a 650 MW combined cycle power plant without an owner. The owner backed out with the Enron collapse. Trust me, I have managed a large industrial complex with no daddy to tell me what to do. The first thing you do is ferret out the possible weak links. Can you say the same?

Yup. I managed a county's public works department on a contract basis after two of the managers got caught stealing and the Director just sort of quietly bowed out. So I took on the roles of all three who by most accounts had contolled the department by intimidation so the rank and file were not real keen on a stranger like me as their new leader. I new what I had to do and I did it but at the end of the 13 months i was there "irregularities" were still surfacing. How long did it take for you to straighten out the mess, if it was a mess, you were burdened with?

Now keep in mind that were talking about a power plant and a county department, not the entire Federal government. How long should it take? Personally, I'm not a bit surprised that issues keep coming up. And I'm sure there will be more right up to his last day in office.

Shortly after this power plant came on line, I was asked why a couple of circumstances occurred, my respoce was that it was former owner corporate policy......the response was so what, you are now in charge. Boy did that sink in. At some point, you have to hold the current administration culpable. When?

When depends on what. I'm just trying to make the point that no one should be expected to take on a new position and automatically know everything that needs to be addressed. I'm not implying that you personally feel this way but there clearly are many others who do seem to. And, even though I have been an Obama supporter I'm getting a little ticked of at what seems to be accepting a response by BP that appears to focus on financial damage control. If this is the case I hold the current administration 100% responsible.

So in a couple of years when this country can barely afford the health care reform bill; we can all sit back and blame Pres. Obama and the rest of the Democrats for it?

No blame should be laid at the feet of the current President or the current Congress?

#5.11:Lack of oversight!

The oversight was the responsibiity of the MMS, which was part of the Interior Department whose staff was appointed by gwb and was a hold-over from the gwb administration. President Obama asked for and received the resignation of the head of the Mines Management Service recently and will "clean house" of all of the gwb-repug trash left over.

So again, this was gwb and his corrupt office holders who allowed this unregulated entity [Oil] to operate. The President, like any other normal thinking adult, believes that some of the people current occupying an office when he arrives is competent in their jobs. So it is expected, when a new administration is brought in, that you don't have to replace every doggone living breathing person currently there. But I guess that is what has to happen- fire everybody and start all over with fresh democratic blood!

And I did say solely -so I still need your answer. None of this is solely President Obama's responsibility! Give him time, you'll be given enough time to blame! But not yet, kiddo.

#5.11:Mary, Lack of oversight.

Tell me, mmman, are you so bitter, hurt and angry that the only thing that you can concentrate on is "blame"? This seems to be your major focus; not what you or we can do to help the President but how you can hold him to blame!

What is it with you anyway with this blame thing! Is it that you can't vote him out of office until the next election (good luck with that one), but in the meantime you try to make sure his life is just as miserable as yours?

Is it that important to you that the President be blamed for what has happened?

What will you get from this - if anything?

You remind me of that person on the television that want to see the President get his hands "dirty"! Why is it important that he get his hands dirty? How dirty are you getting yours?

OK Upswing, how's this: obama voted for this bill when he was a Senator. Oddly, Dick Cheney did not vote on this bill. Yet you claim Cheney is responsible and obama is not.

Blah, blah, blah.

Greg Johnson:

Yet you claim Cheney is responsible and obama is not

How's this?

I never made that claim.

You made that up.

I would say Blah, blah, blah ... But that's a response to people who are blathering, not to people who are outright lying, such as you are.

Because they saw that he had the best chance of winning. And that doesn't change that Republicans got more money overall from the oil industry.

Except they didn't give him more money then anyone else. That's a lie thats been discredited to hell and back why are you people still using it?

So why does BP give more campaign money to Obama than anyone else?

Bp gave Obama $890,000

Bp gave McCain/Palin over $2,400,000

Bp EMPLOYEES gave Obama more money than McCain/Palin.

Studius -

Where does the $890,000 number come from? I've seen it several times, but never a citation. I see here, for instance, that BP gave Obama only $77,051 during his entire tenure as a Senator (including the Presidential campaign). Lisaed (I believe) also cited the $77K number in a number of her messages under other articles. Why the large discrepancy in the number, do you suppose?

sure gotta love how the Democrat cannot take responsibility for anything that happens on their watch...what a disappoint this lot is...

Yes how dare we take your bold face lie apart.

"sure gotta love how the Democrat cannot take responsibility for anything that happens on their watch...what a disappoint this lot is..."

Translation: "I just got my ass caught lying and have nothing to back up my bull@!$%# so I am going to deflect it with this statement."

According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Republicans receive far more campaign money from the oil and gas industry than do Democrats.

"So far in 2010, the oil and gas industries have contributed $12.8 million to all candidates, with 71% of that money going to Republicans. During the 2008 election cycle, 77% of the industry's $35.6 million in contributions went to Republicans, and in the 2008 presidential contest, "

"Palin's accusation and cited Center for Responsive Politics' calculation that Obama had received $71,051 in BP-linked contributions for his presidential campaign. Only problem is, contrary to Palin's and the media's suggestions, all of that money came from BP employees, not BP the company. A spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics confirmed Monday that "the $71,051 that Obama received during the 2008 election cycle was entirely from BP employees." The CRP spokesman also stated that "Obama did not accept contributions from political action committees, so none of this money is from BP's PAC."

rls8r

The money(71,050) Obama got was from BP employees ONLY

Thanks.

No, by "groundwork" I mean the removal of oversight.

I have never been against offshore drilling. I think it is a fine idea with the appropriate environmental and safety oversight to prevent this sort of thing from happenning.

My whole comment basically was about blaming everyone who allowed oversight to be removed, everyone that did nothing to increase oversight afterward, and BP.

And can you prove that statement? Polls are actually showing that a majority of Americans do not like the Tea Party movement and the Conservative party has direct connections to them. This is actually in another Newsvine article.

Let not forget NAFTA that Clinton signed.

Ross Perot was right about the huge sucking sound coming from Mexico.

The sounds of our jobs and future leaving.

NAFTA - Chapter 11 was used in Canada when Exxon Mobile and Murphy Oil Corp. sued Canada for 50 mil.

http://www.canadians.org/energy/issues/energy_strategy/NAFTA.html

Not the courts – a NAFTA tribunal

When the story was first reported in the media last August, Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams said that he would “fight this in court.” While his willingness to defend his province was admirable, he was mistaken about the venue for the fight. Most people would expect that if a foreign company has an issue with the rules and laws of a province or a country, they would simply take their grievance to the courts. However, under NAFTA’s Chapter 11, foreign investors sue governments over public measures like environmental protection, public health protection and the delivery of public services if they interfere with their profits. These cases are not adjudicated by Canadian courts, but by secretive trade tribunals. This does not give any consideration to the country’s laws, commitments to social programs, and environmental, labour or human rights. By giving foreign investors the right to claim damages when government measures interfere with profits, NAFTA has empowered private tribunals to resolve public policy disputes. The result is that foreign companies may use NAFTA freely to challenge public policies and laws they oppose.

As the Exxon case shows, the same secretive process can be used to undermine provincial or local governments that try to maximize the benefits of economic development for their citizens, the true owners of the natural resources. Exxon re-corded profits of $39.5 billion in 2006 and 36.13 billion in 2005. Canadians should have the right to force these companies to spend a few million on research in Newfoundland before taking their Hibernia profits back to Houston.

"Let not forget NAFTA that Clinton signed"

And let's also not forget the signing was symbolic only, the bill had passed with a non-veto majority by the Republican congress.

The NAFTA agreement was actually Bush Sr.'s agreement.

Studiusbagus

You are correct the bill was pushed by the Republican congress( no suprise there).

My point was Clinton did not have the courage to veto the bill even though it would have passed anyway.

"which cut royalties owed to the government for oil and gas drilled on federal lands from depths of 200 meters or more,"

What in the world does that have to do with offshore drilling.....This applies to FEDERAL LAND. ya know? as in DIRT.....Sheesh!

The offshore drilling ban was still in force during Clinton's admin. Bush lifted the ban.

I realize that but the Republican party policy as a whole supports big business. Also be aware that most Republican politicians uphold these policies. I'm an Independent (albeit accidentally since they seem to have a right-wing twist) but I voted for the California primary a mix of Independent and 'Peace and Freedom'.

Ya, only Republicans support big business. That is the expalnation for why BP gave obama more cash than any other individual candidate and why obama keeps throwing tax dollars at Goldman-Sachs, former employer of Rahm Emmanual and Timmy Geitner. And oddly enough, it was during the obama adminstration, after receiving $68,000 from BP, that MMM gave BP a pass on the safety inspection required by the EPA.

He/she/it doesn't understand that but for Big Business, a lot of Americans would be unemployed.

Outsourcing much?

I mean those who work for the corporate giants.

Like the CEOs and the presidents domestically?

The reality is BOTH Republicans and Democrats in Congress turned a blind eye to the crime of OUTSOURCING!

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Obama-vows-to-curb-outsourcing/378452/

While, predictably, the corporations stuffed their pockets and campaign chests with rolls of cash.

I agree with you there. However, since Republicans are more pro-buisness, the Republicans get a significantly higher amount of money.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/21/nation/la-na-fallout22-2010jan22

The Democrats, it must be pointed out, have held power since 2006.

In just a House majority? Ignoring the fact that the Senate and the president were both Republican?

But HAVE REALLY DONE NOTHING to end OUTSOURCING or help restore Americans' lost jobs!

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/30/news/economy/Stimulus_jobs_created/index.htm

Extension of unemployment compensation is like putting a band-aid on a the stump after the arm or leg was hacked off!

That may be the case if the minimum was done. This is not the case.

Americans are being screwed big-time by the self-serving shysters in Congress. They'll all pay a bitter price this November 2nd. Count on it!

The majority in the Senate is Republicans. The House has too many members for corruption to be a big issue.

Now what's this about arguing with me? Oh and by the way, your comments (and this rebuttal) are not related to the article. Let's keep it on topic.

"That is the expalnation for why BP gave obama more cash than any other individual candidate"

A very big LIE!

True or not, they're going to continue spewing it. You could cite any amount of irrefutable evidence and it's not going to change a thing. If their mentor says it then it's true.

I find it equally funny that the media has focused on Palin's ill advised and stupid "Drill, baby, drill" comment but has conveniently left out the fact that Obama was of the same mind until this disaster happened. I guess there are some advantages to being the liberal media's golden boy.

And Sarah Palin doesn't get "advantages" from the conservative media as their golden girl?

I don't know. I don't really follow her since I think she's a joke. I'm at least one conservative who could care less about her. I'll say this though. I've heard a lot of news that mentioned her comment but very, very little about the fact that Obama was planning to open offshore drilling. Once the oil rig blew, that story pretty much died down and when Obama emerged from his silence over this issue (probably to allow enough time to pass so most would forget his earlier stance) the media focused solely on the fact that he's against it and how Palin is for it.

You know what they say about opinions... yours included.

I did notice, however, that you chose to attack my opinion while conveniently not commenting on the main body of my post which is the fact that if Obama made the decision to open more areas to offshore drilling then he either a. knew about what Bush had done and about the laws and proceeded forward anyways, hence he saw nothing wrong with them or b. he charged ahead like he tends to do without thinking things through. Which is it?

Either way, it kind of shoots down the article's claim that the oil spill is all Bush's fault but, of course, you're free to pick and choose the facts you want to hear. After all, everyone has a right to their own opinion but then again, what was the last thing you said about opinions?

This stuff is getting as annoying as 'no-see-'ums' at a picknic. First the BP donations to Obama, then Obama's not being clairvoyant enough to re-structure the MMS before the oil spill, and now this canard about Obama opening up the off-shore areas for drilling. Let's review a little history to see that it was actually Bush II that opened up the off-shore areas for leasing, exploration and production.

First - in the 1980s Congress passed legislation that banned off-shore drilling everywhere but the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico and parts of the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf. Then - Geo. Bush Sr., issued an 'executive withdrawal', which was an Administrative ban on leasing the same areas that Congress had protected. Clinton extended the administrative withdrawal. Thus, there were both Administrative and Congressional prohibitions to leasing in certain off-shore areas.

Then, in 2008, Geo. Bush Jr., removed the executive withdrawal and asked Congress not to extend the moratorium on drilling. Congess then passed funding legislation that did not extend the ban. So - the Bush administration removed essentially both the Adiminstrative and the Congressional prohibitions on leasing and developing the off-shore regions.

That's not the end of the story, though. Areas cannot be leased unless they are on the MMS' approved 5-year program. The 'current' program covers the years from 2007-2012. So - the 5-year plan that could have included the newly-opened off-shore areas should not have been prepared until 2012 - well after Bush would have left office. But - not satisfied that he removed the leasing restrictions, Bush went 'off-schedule', and on the day he left office (January 16, 2009) he left Obama a 'present'. He issued for public comment a Draft Proposed Program (DPP) - a 5-year program that would cover the years 2010-2015, and which included the lease sales in four areas off Alaska, two areas off the Pacific coast, three areas in the Gulf of Mexico, and three areas in the Atlantic.

Shortly after Obama took office Ken Salazar extended the comment period on the Bush administration's DPP an additional 180 days. Then, on March 31, as part of its strategy on "expanded energy development," the Obama administration scaled back the Bush administration's proposal, including the cancellation of five Alaska lease sales, the postponement of a lease sale offshore Virginia, the removal from consideration of leasing in the Pacific, and the go-ahead for studies and potential development in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas offshore Alaska, and the Mid- and South-Atlantic.

Obama's 'decision to open leasing' was an effort to work in a bi-partisan manner by continuing the lease process started by the Bush administration. We've see how good an idea that was - haven't we? Everything Bush touched turned to crap, and has come back to haunt those others who have touched them.

So basically, if you disregard the argument that Bush was evil, his hindsight is supposed to be perfect but Obama is only human? I doubt Bush ever intended this type of scenario nor do I think that Obama would have made a decision open offshore drilling if he realized the potential hazard. I'm not placing the blame at Obama and I don't think the blame Bush game applies here. Yes, there were policies that probably acted at a catalyst but frankly I'm tired of the blame game and this article is just more of the same.

I am interested who is liable such as BP and Transocean and that we learn from our mistakes but playing the blame game is futile and partisan and I'm tired of both sides perpetuating this pathetic little game. The bottom line here is that BP ignored safety procedures to save a few bucks and they messed up. It would have happened regardless of who was in office or what regulations were in place at the time.

Because they were in bed together.

Because they will show our Congress (Intelligence Group) knew Oil was being purchased through Off-Shore Accounts leading back to Texas Big Oil in the early 1990s--the Futures Contracts traded were being held and deliverd on, and shipped to Kuwait. At $10-16.00 per-barrel, it was worth it, to sell our Military services to Arabia and oust Saddam Hussein who supported us for 10-years in almost all U.N Resolutions--we sold him our obsolete weapons and we trained his troops with CIA Operatives. We engaged Iran in a "Ten Years War" and gave gas weapons to Saddam. We instead, should have been promoting Democracy in Iran and we should have engage Khatami when we had the chance. Except, the Clintons were into Futures Trading through thier own Banking Scandal, in which to hide their own illegalities, assisting in the Glass/Steagal overturn was payback for crashing the Sunbelt Banking Regime--a direct conesquence of investigations into thier own Whitewater Scheme of Cattle Futures "Madoff" like Ponzi participation. Then Clinton's affiar and Ollie North and blah, blah, blah.....................

Wall Street and Big Banking vie the Federal Reserve simply need be toppled--an Executive Order declaring "Credit Default Swaps" "Null and Void" would collapse most banking and allow for the Bums in the IMF and Federal Reserve to be demoted to their rightful places--sweeping streets with striped suits that are numbered.

But no................everything in Ameirca is about money--is is a wonder "In God We Trust" is printed on it, but so too often ignored?

Money made by duplicity, simply lends duplicity to others seeking it. CDOs and Synthetic CDOs represent 600-Trillion in duplicity. There is no fixing it. Debt is not GDP Growth. Consumption is not a matter of Trickle Down Economics. Real Estate has only the value of families rasing children--there is no such thing, as Real Estate Markets--only Demand and only People who want it and can afford to own it. K?

We change, by begnining anew, to understand that Economics, are not numbers, but rather people.....................people who do things in exchange for money. You cannot trickle down people's intentions, but rather..................you can build intentions from the ground up. People matter. Houses do not. Real Estate is only valuable when there are people living in it. Otherwise....................it's just a thing of molecules and gases. It is the magic of people and God, who make all things possible.