Obama - what a putz
in [Golf]
|
From: MNMikeW on 17 Jun 2010 13:55 <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message news:sokk16dhm60kc4o9vpg4s44k8cnq1bcdrm(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:37:36 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> > wrote: > >> >><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>news:9mik16lftg6egbk8e2k6lvk0ur7u7uaajf(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:13:42 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>>news:r0ik161g4qt520n3ej3k0k37o49ivg9cjq(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:45:49 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>BP had stated they were going to pay for all of it far before the >>>>>>meeting. >>>>>> >>>>> Empty rhetoric until they were pressed. >>>>> >>>>> BK >>>> >>>>BS. >>> >>> I get it. You think that BP is a fine, upstanding company that is >>> well-intentioned. >> >>They sure were until this happened. > > You don't know what you're talking about Mike. LOL! You might want to look up where BP stood on Obamas agenda. And Obamas statements on offshore drilling before this happened. And your normal condensating remark is duely noted. > > Here is some history, which you probably won't take the time to read, > so here's a quote from the Forbes article. > > "It's been rough few years for BP. Allegations of illegal propane > trading. Massive oil spills in Alaska. A deadly explosion at a Texas > refinery. All this since 2003. Such catastrophes would cripple or kill > most companies". > > This doesn't even take into consideration the criminal charges in the > past. > > http://alaskadispatch.com/dispatches/energy/5369-bp-still-fighting-fines-stemming-from-06-oil-spills-at-prudhoe-bay > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703399204574505034081842414.html > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7062669.stm > http://www.forbes.com/2007/10/25/bp-energy-environment-biz-energy-cx_bw_1025bpfines.html > >>> >>> That's real BS. If they could've gotten away with paying a few >>> thousand bucks, that's what they would do. >>> >>>Of course you know this as fact right? No, more BS. >> > No Mike, not BS. Its their history. Take some time with google and > you'll see. > > BK Yes all oil companies are evil to you leftys. Unless of course they are giving money to them. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/Once-a-government-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html#ixzz0qMSjfkgZ
From: bknight on 17 Jun 2010 14:01 On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:44:29 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > ><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >news:qolk16pabu7kl67jgbv95d1mvpkaiqlqb5(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:41:33 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>news:6pik1651l1qabv9uiejbk91qj68kmirp04(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:13:10 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> I didn't see much hatred for Bush, only a lot of laughter. Hell, he >>>> wasn't the president anyway. Now there may have been hatred for >>>> Cheney. :-) >>>> >>>You obviously have very selective sight. >>> >> >> Typical broad response that doesn't mean anything Mike. Point out >> all of those that you remember. >> >> IMO most everyone made fun of Dubya, but I don't recall hatred. >> BK > >Really? Do I need to dig up some of Randys posts to refresh your memory? > Randy was pretty harsh. That's one, but can't to be construed as a majority, which is what "much" means. Most anti Bush rhetoric was laughing at him, and well deserved IMO. BK
From: bknight on 17 Jun 2010 14:28 On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:55:26 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > ><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >news:sokk16dhm60kc4o9vpg4s44k8cnq1bcdrm(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:37:36 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>news:9mik16lftg6egbk8e2k6lvk0ur7u7uaajf(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:13:42 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>>>news:r0ik161g4qt520n3ej3k0k37o49ivg9cjq(a)4ax.com... >>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:45:49 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>BP had stated they were going to pay for all of it far before the >>>>>>>meeting. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Empty rhetoric until they were pressed. >>>>>> >>>>>> BK >>>>> >>>>>BS. >>>> >>>> I get it. You think that BP is a fine, upstanding company that is >>>> well-intentioned. >>> >>>They sure were until this happened. >> >> You don't know what you're talking about Mike. > >LOL! You might want to look up where BP stood on Obamas agenda. And Obamas >statements on offshore drilling before this happened. And your normal >condensating remark is duely noted. > Damned Mike. You said they were well-intentioned and I gave you several items that showed what they have done in the past 7 years that negated it. >>>> If they could've gotten away with paying a few >>>> thousand bucks, that's what they would do. >>>> >>>>Of course you know this as fact right? No, more BS. >>> >> No Mike, not BS. Its their history. Take some time with google and >> you'll see. >> >> BK > >Yes all oil companies are evil to you leftys. Unless of course they are >giving money to them. >http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/Once-a-government-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html#ixzz0qMSjfkgZ Are you serious? Do you think that this is a defense for BP's actions over the years? Oil companies aren't all evil, but those who continue to operate with little concern for the environment certainly are. Surely you aren't saying that BP has operated properly? Whether or not the government has been remiss doesn't give them a pass for the things they've mismanaged...especially this latest Gulf Coast disaster. BK >
From: MNMikeW on 17 Jun 2010 14:39 <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message news:ndok165rq33fuddjumqsn7baevl9b1ig61(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:44:29 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> > wrote: > >> >><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>news:qolk16pabu7kl67jgbv95d1mvpkaiqlqb5(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:41:33 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>>news:6pik1651l1qabv9uiejbk91qj68kmirp04(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:13:10 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> I didn't see much hatred for Bush, only a lot of laughter. Hell, he >>>>> wasn't the president anyway. Now there may have been hatred for >>>>> Cheney. :-) >>>>> >>>>You obviously have very selective sight. >>>> >>> >>> Typical broad response that doesn't mean anything Mike. Point out >>> all of those that you remember. >>> >>> IMO most everyone made fun of Dubya, but I don't recall hatred. >>> BK >> >>Really? Do I need to dig up some of Randys posts to refresh your memory? >> > Randy was pretty harsh. That's one, but can't to be construed as a > majority, which is what "much" means. Most anti Bush rhetoric was > laughing at him, and well deserved IMO. > > BK > So, what are some of your examples of Obama hatred? Seems most of the anti-Obama rhetoric here is laughing at his ineptness. Also well deserved IMO.
From: MNMikeW on 17 Jun 2010 14:42
<bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message news:7vok16179ev5gq8i2lvhjjb76j9r0lupho(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:55:26 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> > wrote: > >> >><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>news:sokk16dhm60kc4o9vpg4s44k8cnq1bcdrm(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:37:36 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>>news:9mik16lftg6egbk8e2k6lvk0ur7u7uaajf(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:13:42 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>><bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >>>>>>news:r0ik161g4qt520n3ej3k0k37o49ivg9cjq(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:45:49 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>BP had stated they were going to pay for all of it far before the >>>>>>>>meeting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Empty rhetoric until they were pressed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BK >>>>>> >>>>>>BS. >>>>> >>>>> I get it. You think that BP is a fine, upstanding company that is >>>>> well-intentioned. >>>> >>>>They sure were until this happened. >>> >>> You don't know what you're talking about Mike. >> >>LOL! You might want to look up where BP stood on Obamas agenda. And Obamas >>statements on offshore drilling before this happened. And your normal >>condensating remark is duely noted. >> > Damned Mike. You said they were well-intentioned and I gave you > several items that showed what they have done in the past 7 years that > negated it. >>>>> If they could've gotten away with paying a few >>>>> thousand bucks, that's what they would do. >>>>> >>>>>Of course you know this as fact right? No, more BS. >>>> >>> No Mike, not BS. Its their history. Take some time with google and >>> you'll see. >>> >>> BK >> >>Yes all oil companies are evil to you leftys. Unless of course they are >>giving money to them. > >>http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/Once-a-government-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html#ixzz0qMSjfkgZ > > Are you serious? Do you think that this is a defense for BP's > actions over the years? Oil companies aren't all evil, but those who > continue to operate with little concern for the environment certainly > are. > > Surely you aren't saying that BP has operated properly? Whether or > not the government has been remiss doesn't give them a pass for the > things they've mismanaged...especially this latest Gulf Coast > disaster. > > BK >> For the most part they have. |