• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Joe Barton retracts apology to BP

Chappy said:
I don't make fun of Texas or Michigan or anywhere else for that matter (even Mississippi!) because I live in the best place on Earth and I'm better than that.
Click to expand...

Well... in fairness, you live just to the North of the best place on earth...

...where it's a balmy 72 degrees again today... tomorrow. And Sunday.:2razz:



As far as Houston making people stupid; just wait until they new history books come out....:lamo:mrgreen:
 
American said:
Everyone knows that Snopes is questionable, and Factcheck is a left-wing lapdog.
Click to expand...

I didn't think you would have a response when presented with fact. My thought is confirmed.
 
American said:
Everyone knows that Snopes is questionable, and Factcheck is a left-wing lapdog.
Click to expand...

Just like 'everyone knows' Sarah Palin is man, and your master Glenn Beck is a serial killer??

'Everyone knows...'????:2funny::2funny:
 
MyOwnDrum said:
This isn't just an ordinary negligence case. And, the money was put into trust to protect it in case BP goes bankrupt. The people affected by this will be needing the money right away, not 10 or 20 years from now after all the appeals have played out.

Let's face it, Barton is a classic Texas Oilman. He was sticking up for his oil buddies who make up a large part of his financial political base. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.
Click to expand...

That’s not the point. The negligence must be shown legally, not by public opinion and that of our government. The Oil Protection Act was passed in 1990 as a result of the Valdiz spill in order to set the liability limits in civil cases. If a company is shown to be grossly negligent or proven to have failed to use safety measures that are legally required, then at that point, the company is not covered by the act. Our government, cheered on by an angry mob, is circumventing the law that they themselves passed.
Whether we like it or not is not the issue. If our government wanted to force BP to do what our government and the people think is right, then congress should have changed the law, which they failed to do. This is a matter of law. Our country is supposedly a nation of laws, not a nation of men, as it should be imo.


From Wiki:
Following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, numerous U.S. Senators attempted to pass a bill to raise the $75 million cap limit to $10 billion, retroactive to before the spill occurred. Senators of both Republican Party and Democratic Party blocked efforts for new legislation on multiple occasions due to the potential unintended consequences that a new law could have.[4]. Democratic Party senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana was quoted in saying “We want to be careful before we change any of these laws that we don’t jeopardize the operations of an ongoing industry, because there are 4,000 other wells in the Gulf that have to go on.”[4] This statute limits BP's monetary damages to $75 million for losses to private parties, although it still remains liable for all cleanup costs under the law.[5]
Click to expand...
 
Excerpted from “Top Corporate Donor to Barton Is Partner of BP on Deepwater Horizon” by Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight, @ 2:26 PM, 6.17.2010
[SIZE="+2"]M[/SIZE]aking matters worse for Barton is the identity of the top contributor to his election campaigns. Since 1989, it has been the company Anadarko Petroleum, from which he's received $56,500 in PAC donations and another $90,000 in individual contributions.

…


Anadarko has been making a lot of news lately, and none of it is good: they're a 25 percent partner in the Macondo Prospect, which was the site of the Deepwater Horizon explosion that is causing oil to spill into the Gulf of Mexico. Anadarko has also been sent a bill by BP and asked to pay its share of the cleanup costs.
Click to expand...
:shock: :shock: :shock:
 
lizzie said:
That’s not the point. The negligence must be shown legally, not by public opinion and that of our government. The Oil Protection Act was passed in 1990 as a result of the Valdiz spill in order to set the liability limits in civil cases. If a company is shown to be grossly negligent or proven to have failed to use safety measures that are legally required, then at that point, the company is not covered by the act. Our government, cheered on by an angry mob, is circumventing the law that they themselves passed.
Whether we like it or not is not the issue. If our government wanted to force BP to do what our government and the people think is right, then congress should have changed the law, which they failed to do. This is a matter of law. Our country is supposedly a nation of laws, not a nation of men, as it should be imo.


From Wiki:
Click to expand...

What exatcly do you need to believe that the only people at fault of the BP oil spill are the people working for BP?
 
Hatuey said:
What exatcly do you need to believe that the only people at fault of the BP oil spill are the people working for BP?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what I believe. It matters that liability is proved via legal avenues, and not those of public and/or presidential opinion.
 
Sometimes the flip flops ARE the icing on the cake

3735462392_fedac8812f.jpg
 
lizzie said:
It doesn't matter what I believe. It matters that liability is proved via legal avenues, and not those of public and/or presidential opinion.
Click to expand...
or, as is this instance, the perpetrator acknowledges responsibility and initiates action to make appropriate restitution
but it is recognized that the wingers do tend to absolve the wealthy of any responsibility, to then stick uncle sugare with the tab, all the while whining about lack of fiscal restraint
the bailout is an imperfect example of that inclination
 
lizzie said:
Because they and the president are acting outside the boundaries of established laws and acts.
Click to expand...

what legal boundaries have they exceeded, specifically
 
A lot of throat clearing and jerking off, but nobody has addressed Turtle Dude's analysis with anything resembling substance.

Rule of law?
Or... as we have today...

... Ruse of law.

.
 
texmaster said:
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) is apologizing for his apology.

After infuriating Democrats and Republicans alike with his public apology to BP and suggesting that a $20 billion escrow fund was a “shakedown” by the White House, Barton is now “retracting” his statement, made at a hearing with BP CEO Tony Hayward.

“I apologize for using the term ‘shakedown’ with regard to yesterday’s actions at the White House in my opening statement this morning, and I retract my apology to BP,” Barton said. “As I told my colleagues yesterday and said again this morning, BP should bear the full financial responsibility for the accident on their lease in the Gulf of Mexico. BP should fully compensate those families and businesses that have been hurt by this accident.”

Joe Barton retracts apology to BP - Jonathan Allen and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

blurb_facepalm2_20090622.jpg


This guy isn't with us. This is why we make fun of Houston.

Seriously, this comment of a shakedown was incredibly stupid. Monumentally stupid. This company has over 700 safety violations setting a record and you're going to call getting money to people who need it from this company a shakedown?
Click to expand...

I would like to apologize for Rep. Joe Barton's apology of Rep. Joe Barton's use of the term "shakedown". Iran is on the verge of getting nukes and the war in the ME rages on, but the best America can come up with to fuss over is a term.
 
Jerry said:
I would like to apologize for Rep. Joe Barton's apology of Rep. Joe Barton's use of the term "shakedown". Iran is on the verge of getting nukes and the war in the ME rages on, but the best America can come up with to fuss over is a term.
Click to expand...

I would like to apologize for my apology of Rep. Joe Barton's apology of Rep. Joe Barton's use of the term "shakedown". There was no need to take a cheap shot at the American public's short attention span and narrow, self-centered world view.
 
justabubba said:
what legal boundaries have they exceeded, specifically
Click to expand...

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Of course your next argument will be that BP voluntarily placed 20 billion dollars in an escrow account that Barry controls...... and that would be very disingenuous to say the least.
 
Jerry said:
I would like to apologize for Rep. Joe Barton's apology of Rep. Joe Barton's use of the term "shakedown". Iran is on the verge of getting nukes and the war in the ME rages on, but the best America can come up with to fuss over is a term.
Click to expand...

and flags, flag pins, being called "small", not moving fast enough, moving too fast, too much, not enough, etc. etc.
 
WhyteRash said:
and flags, flag pins, being called "small", not moving fast enough, moving too fast, too much, not enough, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Let me guess..... you're free associating, right?
 
justabubba said:
make that case counselor
almost as misguided as barton's "shakedown" statement
Click to expand...

I doubt you would understand

given BP only has at most 75 Million in liability why would they agree to a much larger amount but for the threat of criminal prosecution

Given faulty inspections and arguable recovery due to the alleged negligence of third party sub contractors. it makes no sense to agree to such a huge slush fund but for a shake down
 
justabubba said:
or, as is this instance, the perpetrator acknowledges responsibility and initiates action to make appropriate restitution
but it is recognized that the wingers do tend to absolve the wealthy of any responsibility, to then stick uncle sugare with the tab, all the while whining about lack of fiscal restraint
the bailout is an imperfect example of that inclination
Click to expand...

That is just stupid and the wealthy already shoulder far more responsibility than the parasites who sit around and whine that they deserve more of the wealthy's property
 
zimmer said:
A lot of throat clearing and jerking off, but nobody has addressed Turtle Dude's analysis with anything resembling substance.

Rule of law?
Or... as we have today...

... Ruse of law.

.
Click to expand...

Logic tends to affect the libs much like sunlight a vampire
 
Jerry said:
I would like to apologize for my apology of Rep. Joe Barton's apology of Rep. Joe Barton's use of the term "shakedown". There was no need to take a cheap shot at the American public's short attention span and narrow, self-centered world view.
Click to expand...

I thought that maybe you wanted to apologize for talking to yourself again. :mrgreen:
 
justabubba said:
what legal boundaries have they exceeded, specifically
Click to expand...

The ones in that little piece of paper we call the Constitution.

Everyone is entitled to their day in court prior to declaring guilt. You, I, and everyone on this forum may believe that BP is liable for damages, but it is not legal nor ethical for individuals or our government to be making deals when negligence or illegality has not been established. If the federal government wants to insure that losses will be covered for those who will be losing income, then they should set aside funding for that, just as they funded the losses in hurricane Katrina. They should also have had the foresight to increase liability caps on businesses to keep up with current monetary rates of inflation and cost of living. BP or any other business in the oil industry is legally liable for 75 million dollars plus the costs of clean-up until negligence or breaking regulatory standards has been legally established.
 
MyOwnDrum said:
This isn't just an ordinary negligence case. And, the money was put into trust to protect it in case BP goes bankrupt. The people affected by this will be needing the money right away, not 10 or 20 years from now after all the appeals have played out.

Let's face it, Barton is a classic Texas Oilman. He was sticking up for his oil buddies who make up a large part of his financial political base. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.
Click to expand...

A couple of points here.

The 20 billion won't be funded immediately but over 3 years.
So it has nothing to do with whether or not BP goes bankrupt, not to mention that the UK would probably bail them out if they were on the edge of bankruptcy.

The president appointed his political choice to manage the fund, not an independent regulator.

To me the "fund" is little more than political grandstanding and nothing else.
 
Last edited:
I completely agree with Biden's statement on this.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom