From: BAR on 6 Jun 2010 18:54
In article <wclark2-65014A.18350006062010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
> > > > Do you think that Obama's plan to expand off shore driulling was
> > > > connected in any way to these contributions? �
> > > >
> > > > In any case, it looks real bad for Obama right now to have a major oil
> > > > spill disaster at an offshore drilling site right after he proposed to
> > > > expand off shore drilling.
> > >
> > > I think you're incredibly naive to think that a $71,000 contribution
> > > to a campaign that cost hundreds of millions would have any effect at
> > > all.
> > I think you are incredibly stupid to not understand how politics works.
> I think you and Jack are incredibly duplicitious not to acknowledge that
> big oil splashes money around to both parties like a Gulf oil leak, just
> to keep in with all sides.
The split from most industries, not all, usually runs 60/40 or 70/30 to
the party in power or the ascending party.
From: Carbon on 6 Jun 2010 19:03
On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 18:51:24 -0400, BAR wrote:
> In article <wclark2-DEAC86.18384706062010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
>> You would have preferred a tortoise over Obama, as long as it had
>> "GOP" written on its back.
Behold, the True Believer.
The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference
between a mermaid and a seal.
-- Mark Twain
From: Jack Hollis on 6 Jun 2010 19:10
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:11:16 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>> In any case, Bush got the blame even though, as you say, he had
>> nothing to do with it. =A0Unfortunately for Obama, he will also get the
>> blame for the failures of the Gulf oil leak. =A0And it looks like this
>> is going to go on for a long time.
>FEMA had responded well to previous hurricanes because it was staffed
>with people with experience and expertise in emergency management,
>e.g. Jamie Lee Whitt. Bush turned it into a dumping ground for
>political pals and people who had worked on his campaign. "Brownie"
>had zero - repeat: zero - background in emergency services. Even if
>they had known what they were doing, it's kind of ridiculous to
>suggest that the incompetence of local officials kept them from being
>able to do their job.
There were 4 major hurricanes in Fla in 2004 and just after Katrina
came Rita in Texas and FIMA did fine. No, the disaster in NO was due
to incompetent local officials.
From: Jack Hollis on 6 Jun 2010 19:17
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:14:25 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>> In any case, it looks real bad for Obama right now to have a major oil
>> spill disaster at an offshore drilling site right after he proposed to
>> expand off shore drilling.
>I think you're incredibly naive to think that a $71,000 contribution
>to a campaign that cost hundreds of millions would have any effect at
BP was Obama's #1 contributor. If you don't think that counts for
much, you're the one who is naive. Of course other Democrats got
plenty from BP. As is usually the case, the party in power gets more.
From: Jack Hollis on 6 Jun 2010 19:18
On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 15:26:50 -0500, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote:
>>But Katrina was an act of God. The oil spill was caused by BP and
>>they're Obama's biggest campaign contributor.
>How, in any way, does that make Obama or the government accountable
>for cleaning up BP's mess?
The blame for this mess will be shared by BP and Obama. When you're
in charge, there's no way to avoid blame. It's not fair, but that's
the way it is.