Gulf Oil Spill: Joe Barton's "Shakedown" Comment, Obama F'ing Up Again

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@jrodefeld

That’s a nice sentiment, but there is a bigger issue here. Can’t you see that those of us who defend the Constitution and the rule of law are not defending BP? If you say, well its the right thing to do in this case, it sets a bad precedent.

How are you defending teh constitution again?

Even so as I said earlier, what gives you confidence in the governments ability to justly distribute this money to the people who have been legitimately hurt by this crisis? If you think they will do a good job with that, then you certainly have much more faith in government than I do.

Kenneth Feinberg is running the fund.

Secondly, the damages go way beyond twenty million. What happens next? With they continue to extract money endlessly? Will they bypass the courts entirely?

You think that avoiding costly litigation is a bad thing? You know litigation is one of those nasty “transaction costs” that distort econmic behaviour right? I predict that there will be a tail end of questionble claims that will ultimately have to be settled in court but the vast majority of those claims are not questionable and can be dispatched quickly and easily.

[Lightnin]

@Marley23

Can we get a cite on that? The Politico story says the $77K total includes " BP PAC and individual money."

Link.

@Media Matters

In fact, President Obama received no PAC money from BP during his presidential campaign, and only $1,000 during his 2004 Senate campaign.

@Media Matters

…while Obama received $71,051 in BP-linked contributions during his presidential campaign – more BP money than any other candidate received – all of that money came from BP employees, not from BP’s PAC or from the company itself.

I’m not sure if they’re contradicting themselves there or not- but either way, it’s only a thousand bucks.

[Shodan]

@Marley23

When did Obama work for a division of BP, Shodan?

Where did I claim he did?

Regards,
Shodan

[Fear_Itself]

@Shodan

Where did I claim he did?

Exactly. You countered a claim that Barton use to work in the management of Arco with the weak sauce about donations to Obama.

[Marley23]

@Shodan

Where did I claim he did?

By overlooking the employment issue you ignored a lot of that post. Brainglutton didn’t say anybody who took money from BP is untrustworthy and compromised. He said Barton, who used to work in the oil industry at a business that is now part of BP and who has taken $1.4 million in oil industry contributions during his career, was compromised. His claim was much more specific than your response.

Breakdown of Barton’s donors by industry and by company. It sounds like Barton gets about as much money from oil companies per House election as Obama has ever received from BP employees.

[Shodan]

@Marley23

By overlooking the employment issue you ignored a lot of that post.

No, actually you are attempting to ignore my post.
Obama has never held a job in private industry. Indeed, he has never held any job for very long. So comparisons like that are rather apples to oranges.

It sounds like Barton gets about as much money from oil companies per House election as Obama has ever received from BP employees.

You are comparing figures from one election cycle for BHO vs. cycles going back to 1989 for Barton. All of Obama’s national experience put together doesn’t add up to half of Barton’s. And yet, Obama is making decisions that are just as likely to appear to be conflicts of interest as Barton.

I know you want to deny it, but it remains true. If Barton is presumed corrupt, there is even more reason to presume that Obama is corrupt, for the same reasons, or even more.

I know, I know - IOKIADDI.

Regards,
Shodan

[Shodan]

@Fear_Itself

Exactly. You countered a claim that Barton use to work in the management of Arco with the weak sauce about donations to Obama.

No, I didn’t - I countered a claim that Barton was corrupt because he took contributions from the oil industry with absolutely factual claims that Obama should be considered corrupt for the same reason.

Regards,
Shodan

[Lobohan]

@Shodan

No, I didn’t - I countered a claim that Barton was corrupt because he took contributions from the oil industry with absolutely factual claims that Obama should be considered corrupt for the same reason.

Regards,
Shodan

I don’t think you have a solid understanding of what absolutely factual means. Aside from whether the money came from the PAC or workers, you should consider that Barton wants to prostrate himself to BP, whereas Obama wants them to be held accountable. One of these things is corruption for money, the other is integrity in the face of money.

I appreciate being able to walk you along the path to understanding.

[Shodan]

@Lightnin

And what that article *doesn’t *tell you is that the money came from BP employees, not from BP.

Barton runs for Congress, and accepts money from PACs. Therefore, he is presumed to have been corrupted, right?

Obama ran for Congress, and accepted money from PACs. Therefore…

Regards,
Shodan

[Baboonanza]

@Shodan

No, I didn’t - I countered a claim that Barton was corrupt because he took contributions from the oil industry with absolutely factual claims that Obama should be considered corrupt for the same reason.

But you’re claiming that ~$1.4 million in donation plus executive employment in the industry is equal to ~$77K in donations of which and unknown proportion came directly from an Oil company.

Clearly they are not equal and it’s silly to try and pretend that they are.

[Marley23]

@Shodan

You are comparing figures from one election cycle for BHO vs. cycles going back to 1989 for Barton.

Barton’s contributions in 2008 included $219,490 from the oil and gas industry.

And yet, Obama is making decisions that are just as likely to appear to be conflicts of interest as Barton.

Brainglutton explained his take on Barton’s conflict of interest. You’re free to explain Obama’s conflict of interest if you can think of one, but so far it looks lke you’re gainsaying Brainglutton with something that is 50 percent off-topic. He did not say anyone who accepted money from an oil company is corrupt. He said Barton, who worked in the oil industry, has accepted a lot of money from that industry, and has criticized the “shake down” of BP, is compromised on this issue. That’s a much more specific claim than the one you responded to.

If Barton is presumed corrupt, there is even more reason to presume that Obama is corrupt, for the same reasons, or even more.

“Even more?” How do you figure?

[Shodan]

@Lobohan

I don’t think you have a solid understanding of what absolutely factual means.

I do - much better than you, apparently.

Look, I understand - these facts are deeply disruptive of the non-factually-based thinking in your post. I understand how upsetting it is for you to see this. I find it difficult to be sympathetic, but I understand.

Regards,
Shodan

[Lightnin]

Is there a term for making up your opponent’s argumentative position, and then arguing against that position? I could’ve sworn there was.

[Lobohan]

@Shodan

I do - much better than you, apparently.

Look, I understand - these facts are deeply disruptive of the non-factually-based thinking in your post. I understand how upsetting it is for you to see this. I find it difficult to be sympathetic, but I understand.

Regards,
Shodan

Maybe you should address what I wrote instead of degenerating into fantasy?

Doesn’t it embarrass you to fail so utterly to make your point so often?

[Czarcasm]

@Shodan

I do - much better than you, apparently.

Look, I understand - these facts are deeply disruptive of the non-factually-based thinking in your post. I understand how upsetting it is for you to see this. I find it difficult to be sympathetic, but I understand.

Gloating disguised as fake sympathy is very unbecoming.

[Marley23]

@Shodan

Look, I understand - these facts are deeply disruptive of the non-factually-based thinking in your post. I understand how upsetting it is for you to see this. I find it difficult to be sympathetic, but I understand.

@Lobohan

Maybe you should address what I wrote instead of degenerating into fantasy?

Doesn’t it embarrass you to fail so utterly to make your point so often?

Please dial it back, both of you.

[Gangster_Octopus]

Right wingers don’t realize that “the legal way” to do things and using “the courts” is used when there is a dispute. What I just cannot understand is how come the wingers are so upset about something that the parties involved are not complaining about. Actually I understand it completely, Obama has goitten something useful and constructive done annd they HATE him for it.

[elucidator]

@Marley23

…“Even more?” How do you figure?

Obama’s money represents approximately one twentieth that of Barton’s. Hence, it is twenty times more effective. Its the principle of homeopathic medicine applied to political science.

[Lobohan]

@elucidator

Obama’s money represents approximately one twentieth that of Barton’s. Hence, it is twenty times more effective. Its the principle of homeopathic medicine applied to political science.

Hmm… this might explain the dearth of Conservative Ideas.

[Bridget_Burke]

@Lobohan

I don’t think you have a solid understanding of what absolutely factual means. Aside from whether the money came from the PAC or workers, you should consider that Barton wants to prostrate himself to BP, whereas Obama wants them to be held accountable. One of these things is corruption for money, the other is integrity in the face of money.

I appreciate being able to walk you along the path to understanding.

Molly Ivins said this:

if you can’t drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, and vote against ‘em anyway, you don’t belong in office”

(Although she may not have been the *first *to do so.)