BP and the Idiot Fringe Protest Groups

[random3434]

Foxfire,, you do have good points, we do want to keep BP to pay for this, and bankrupting them would just make the government have to pay instead.

Now for the protesters, they are doing this because they are mad, frustrated, and feel this is the only way they can show that frustration.

Kind of like the Tea Party people at a rally.

And jeffrockit is right, a lot of the BP stations are owned by Joe Smoe, it's not his fault what happened in the Gulf.

I feel helpless every day I see the destruction on the news. I couldn't even imagine living down there, those poor people who are effected by this.............so sad.

No, this is way different than a Tea Party. Tea Partiers are protesting against what they believe to be irresponsible government and petitioning for responsible government. They aren't out to boycott or hurt anybody though they do want the irresponsible tossed and the responsible to take the place of those tossed.

And I understand why the people protesting BP are angry. But can't you be angry and smart at the same time?

As you pointed out, if BP is bankrupted, then somebody else will have to pay the billions it will cost to fix the problem and clean up the mess.

You mentioned the government will have to pay it. But as we Tea Partiers )) know, the government has no money that we don't give them or that isn't borrowed using our sweat and blood as collateral.

Do you really think anyone will be influenced by these protesters? Or at least that enough people will for it to matter? I don't..

That's the same question people ask the Tea Party People.

It's a free country, let the Tea Party people protest, let the Anti-BP people protest, let the Fred Phepls people protest, just make sure you get 1000 gay men and women to make out in front of them to hide them from the families of who they are protesting.

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfire,, you do have good points, we do want to keep BP to pay for this, and bankrupting them would just make the government have to pay instead.

Now for the protesters, they are doing this because they are mad, frustrated, and feel this is the only way they can show that frustration.

Kind of like the Tea Party people at a rally.

And jeffrockit is right, a lot of the BP stations are owned by Joe Smoe, it's not his fault what happened in the Gulf.

I feel helpless every day I see the destruction on the news. I couldn't even imagine living down there, those poor people who are effected by this.............so sad.

No, this is way different than a Tea Party. Tea Partiers are protesting against what they believe to be irresponsible government and petitioning for responsible government. They aren't out to boycott or hurt anybody though they do want the irresponsible tossed and the responsible to take the place of those tossed.

And I understand why the people protesting BP are angry. But can't you be angry and smart at the same time?

As you pointed out, if BP is bankrupted, then somebody else will have to pay the billions it will cost to fix the problem and clean up the mess.

You mentioned the government will have to pay it. But as we Tea Partiers )) know, the government has no money that we don't give them or that isn't borrowed using our sweat and blood as collateral.

Do you really think anyone will be influenced by these protesters? Or at least that enough people will for it to matter? I don't..

Well I hope you mean those protesting BP and not the Tea Partiers.

One or two angry mobs won't make a difference, no. But if they are successful getting some media attention start infecting all the numbnuts across the land, it could have an effect. And it just makes more sense to me to give the offending parties--in this case BP is the flag bearer for that--incentive and encouragement to get the job done. I don't see any profit in trying to hurt them financially and making it more difficult for them to do that.

Once the problem is solved, then there will be plenty of time for hearings and distribution of punative fines or whatever.

But right now let's focus on plugging the damn hole and restoring the Gulf environment.

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfire,, you do have good points, we do want to keep BP to pay for this, and bankrupting them would just make the government have to pay instead.

Now for the protesters, they are doing this because they are mad, frustrated, and feel this is the only way they can show that frustration.

Kind of like the Tea Party people at a rally.

And jeffrockit is right, a lot of the BP stations are owned by Joe Smoe, it's not his fault what happened in the Gulf.

I feel helpless every day I see the destruction on the news. I couldn't even imagine living down there, those poor people who are effected by this.............so sad.

No, this is way different than a Tea Party. Tea Partiers are protesting against what they believe to be irresponsible government and petitioning for responsible government. They aren't out to boycott or hurt anybody though they do want the irresponsible tossed and the responsible to take the place of those tossed.

And I understand why the people protesting BP are angry. But can't you be angry and smart at the same time?

As you pointed out, if BP is bankrupted, then somebody else will have to pay the billions it will cost to fix the problem and clean up the mess.

You mentioned the government will have to pay it. But as we Tea Partiers )) know, the government has no money that we don't give them or that isn't borrowed using our sweat and blood as collateral.

If BP goes bankrupt, and the government has to pay for it, will you Tea Partiers protest that lol?

Good question. I think they will likely protest any incompetency, delays, or dumb decisions that prolong the process and make it far more devastating and far more expensive to clean up.

 

[jeffrockit]

Foxfire,, you do have good points, we do want to keep BP to pay for this, and bankrupting them would just make the government have to pay instead.

Now for the protesters, they are doing this because they are mad, frustrated, and feel this is the only way they can show that frustration.

Kind of like the Tea Party people at a rally.

And jeffrockit is right, a lot of the BP stations are owned by Joe Smoe, it's not his fault what happened in the Gulf.

I feel helpless every day I see the destruction on the news. I couldn't even imagine living down there, those poor people who are effected by this.............so sad.

What people need to realize about picketers and protesters is that they are absolutely within THEIR rights to do so. Although that Sangha dude, who strangely has disappeared, did try to tell me once that picketing was terrorism.

They are within their rights, but that does not make it any less senseless and illogical.

 

[Old Rocks]

What we are looking at are estuaries and wetlands, tidal marshes, not beaches. This kind of ecology will not 'clean up'. It will be years before we know the true toll of this catastrophe. As far as BP goes, use their money until they are bankrupt and have no more, then we, the taxpayers, will have to foot the rest of the bill.

Now the next step is why are we allowing anybody to drill in this environment? All of life is a balance between risk and benefit. Did nobody assess the risk benefit ratio here? I cannot believe they did, for how much oil is worth the ecosystem of the Gulf? Do you understand how many species use this as a spawning ground?

 

[Claudette]

No, this is way different than a Tea Party. Tea Partiers are protesting against what they believe to be irresponsible government and petitioning for responsible government. They aren't out to boycott or hurt anybody though they do want the irresponsible tossed and the responsible to take the place of those tossed.

And I understand why the people protesting BP are angry. But can't you be angry and smart at the same time?

As you pointed out, if BP is bankrupted, then somebody else will have to pay the billions it will cost to fix the problem and clean up the mess.

You mentioned the government will have to pay it. But as we Tea Partiers )) know, the government has no money that we don't give them or that isn't borrowed using our sweat and blood as collateral.

Do you really think anyone will be influenced by these protesters? Or at least that enough people will for it to matter? I don't..

Well I hope you mean those protesting BP and not the Tea Partiers.

One or two angry mobs won't make a difference, no. But if they are successful getting some media attention start infecting all the numbnuts across the land, it could have an effect. And it just makes more sense to me to give the offending parties--in this case BP is the flag bearer for that--incentive and encouragement to get the job done. I don't see any profit in trying to hurt them financially and making it more difficult for them to do that.

Once the problem is solved, then there will be plenty of time for hearings and distribution of punative fines or whatever.

But right now let's focus on plugging the damn hole and restoring the Gulf environment.

Your so right Fox.

Stop the leak. Clean up the mess. Assess the long term effects on the Gulf and then go after the parties at fault.

BP will be paying for the damages, restitution, cleanup and whatever else has to be payed for. They sure can't do that if they are out of business.


Jeeze. Just plain common sense.

 

[Foxfyre]

What we are looking at are estuaries and wetlands, tidal marshes, not beaches. This kind of ecology will not 'clean up'. It will be years before we know the true toll of this catastrophe. As far as BP goes, use their money until they are bankrupt and have no more, then we, the taxpayers, will have to foot the rest of the bill.

Now the next step is why are we allowing anybody to drill in this environment? All of life is a balance between risk and benefit. Did nobody assess the risk benefit ratio here? I cannot believe they did, for how much oil is worth the ecosystem of the Gulf? Do you understand how many species use this as a spawning ground?

Come on old chap. Focus now.

Doesn't it make sense at all to you that the focus NOW should be on getting the hole plugged and the beaches cleaned up? And doesn't it make sense to give BP all the help it needs to do that instead of looking for ways to punish BP NOW?

That's all we're saying here.

Geez, some of you guys seem to just want to ignore the immediate problem and start doing studies and revamping of policy, etc. etc. etc. Do you start the investigation into who started the fire and plan the trial and conviction before you put the fire out?

How about putting first things first?

 

[Foxfyre]

Do you really think anyone will be influenced by these protesters? Or at least that enough people will for it to matter? I don't..

Well I hope you mean those protesting BP and not the Tea Partiers.

One or two angry mobs won't make a difference, no. But if they are successful getting some media attention start infecting all the numbnuts across the land, it could have an effect. And it just makes more sense to me to give the offending parties--in this case BP is the flag bearer for that--incentive and encouragement to get the job done. I don't see any profit in trying to hurt them financially and making it more difficult for them to do that.

Once the problem is solved, then there will be plenty of time for hearings and distribution of punative fines or whatever.

But right now let's focus on plugging the damn hole and restoring the Gulf environment.

Your so right Fox.

Stop the leak. Clean up the mess. Assess the long term effects on the Gulf and then go after the parties at fault.

BP will be paying for the damages, restitution, cleanup and whatever else has to be payed for. They sure can't do that if they are out of business.


Jeeze. Just plain common sense.

Yep. From my perspective it's a no brainer.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Sometimes I just sit back, shake my head, and wonder what people are thinking.

The oil gusher in the Gulf--tragic almost beyond comprehension. Unconscionable. I think no sane person can watch it happen and not feel anger, even rage, that it is happening.

Who is culpable? BP? Yes, but does anybody with a brain think that they WANTED this to happen? That they wanted to incur expenses that could bring them to financial ruin? Were they irreponsible or careless in the name of profit? The hearings should sort that out eventually.

The Obama Administration? It was his inspector who waived some of the usual checks and balances? Irresponsible or careless in the name of expediency? Maybe. The hearings may or may not ever sort that out.

The Bush Administration? They allowed the lease to be issued. Irrresponsible or careless in the name of energy production? Maybe. If there is any way to hang it on them, the current Administration/Congress surely will.

So now enters the protestors. Outraged. Indignant. Environmentally infuriated. Make them pay. Boycott their products. Bring them to their financial knees.

Really? Who with a brain would seek to bankrupt the company who is going to have to pay for the plugging of the blown well as well as the cleanup? And if they bring BP to its financial knees, which apparently won't be difficult at that point, then who do they look to shoulder that expense.

Sometimes you just have to see the idiot fringe for what it is.

BP Protests: Do They Hit the Right Target?
June 14, 2010
Mary C. Curtis
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Do protests against the company involved in America's worst oil-spill disaster hurt BP's excess or independent businesses? It's a question being asked as conditions on the Gulf of Mexico worsen and worldwide frustration with BP and its chief executive, Tony Hayward, grows.

On Saturday, protesters targeted BP stations across the country, a scene that also played out on a Charlotte street corner. Separated by a few feet -- with occasional harsh words passing back and forth -- stood members of the Action Center for Justice and a vocal supporter of the station owner.

David Dixon is co-coordinator of the center, part of the International Action Center. As he held a sign that read "BP Has Bad Record" and "Unsafe," he said the protesters want station owners to stop buying BP gas and to get out of their contracts. Until then, they are "complicit in BP's crimes," which are "not just destroying nature ... People are being killed." Dixon said.

A friend of station owner/operator Ron Rybacki said he was not there as a member of any group and had never protested anything before. "Independent businesses have nothing to do with the oil spill," said Sam, who didn't want to give his last name. "Yes, it's a disaster of Biblical proportions, but I don't think anybody understands it has nothing to do with this gentleman here."

Sam brought a sign that said of the protest: "Endorsed by ACORN, manned by useful idiots (a reference to Soviet sympathizers in the West). He said later they were "fomenting unrest" Other supporters held signs that said: "I love my local BP!"

Placing blame isn't easy. In 2008, the London-based BP announced it was leaving the retail gasoline business because margins were lousy, according to CNN. Today, the 11,500 U.S. gas stations that carry its logo are owned by independent franchisees. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, purchasing gasoline from a company does not even mean the gasoline was produced by that company's refineries.
More here:
BP Protests: Do They Hit the Right Target?

Do you honestly think BP's number one priority was safety? When you honestly answer this, you will just shut up and not say another word even remotely defending them.

Its all about $$$. They were fined a lot, a lot of money for cutting corners. It turned out they pretty much wrote their own damn rules and still cut corners. THAT IS WHY THIS IS HAPPENING.

More proof Zona is retarded.

 

[Montrovant]

Foxfyre, while I'm not someone who would protest like these people and try and put BP out of business, I have a possible answer to the rationale behind it. Other than basic anger and frustration at the Gulf situation, perhaps these people feel that if you don't do everything possible to try and hurt BP now, if you let things slide in the name of expediency, that nothing will end up getting done. That, by delaying punishment, by the time the leak is plugged and the clean-up done (or at least underway, who knows how long it will take to actually finish) people will no longer feel the anger they currently do at BP and their punishment will be too lenient. They are afraid to wait and lose the people's feeling of righteous anger.

It's just a theory, and I'm sure it doesn't cover all the protesters even if it's true for some

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre, while I'm not someone who would protest like these people and try and put BP out of business, I have a possible answer to the rationale behind it. Other than basic anger and frustration at the Gulf situation, perhaps these people feel that if you don't do everything possible to try and hurt BP now, if you let things slide in the name of expediency, that nothing will end up getting done. That, by delaying punishment, by the time the leak is plugged and the clean-up done (or at least underway, who knows how long it will take to actually finish) people will no longer feel the anger they currently do at BP and their punishment will be too lenient. They are afraid to wait and lose the people's feeling of righteous anger.

It's just a theory, and I'm sure it doesn't cover all the protesters even if it's true for some

Well at least you and a few others provide a reasoned perspective on that, but I just don't see it. I believe there are those who put revenge or punishment or humiliating somebody way ahead of ANYTHING else. They feel smug and superior when they act out righteous anger. You don't see on those signs "PLUG THE LEAK" or "SAVE OUR BEACHES!" You see get BP, punish BP, destroy BP, boycott BP.

If they gave a damn about the leak or the beaches they would be directing their energies at the Administration and Congress demanding that they set aside the Jones Act and let other countries with knowhow come help. They would be demanding that environmental impact studies be set aside so that Louisiana could construct barriers to save their beaches as they have been begging to do. They would be demanding that every ship, apparatus, expert, process, and concept be utilized now to fix the problem.

But their energies don't seem to be directed there do they?

 

[ABikerSailor]

In addition to protesting BP, they should also go after Halliburton, because that is the company that had the messed up BOP valves.

Matter of fact, anyone notice Cheney is strangely silent right now?

Additionally, now some internal e-mails have been released, and it shows incompetence at all levels of leadership in BP and Halliburton.

And Cheney is the one that did the backroom meetings with BP.

 

[Foxfyre]

In addition to protesting BP, they should also go after Halliburton, because that is the company that had the messed up BOP valves.

Matter of fact, anyone notice Cheney is strangely silent right now?

Additionally, now some internal e-mails have been released, and it shows incompetence at all levels of leadership in BP and Halliburton.

And Cheney is the one that did the backroom meetings with BP.

Well first, Cheney has had no financial interest in and no involvement with Halliburton since before 2001. And he has absolutely no authority to order anything to happen with the current oil disaster now.

Second, aren't you interested at all in stopping the leak and cleaning up the environment? And who is in a better position to make that happen than the current Administration who does have virtually unlimited authority to do what is necessary to make it happen?

 

[ABikerSailor]

In addition to protesting BP, they should also go after Halliburton, because that is the company that had the messed up BOP valves.

Matter of fact, anyone notice Cheney is strangely silent right now?

Additionally, now some internal e-mails have been released, and it shows incompetence at all levels of leadership in BP and Halliburton.

And Cheney is the one that did the backroom meetings with BP.

Well first, Cheney has had no financial interest in and no involvement with Halliburton since before 2001. And he has absolutely no authority to order anything to happen with the current oil disaster now.

Second, aren't you interested at all in stopping the leak and cleaning up the environment? And who is in a better position to make that happen than the current Administration who does have virtually unlimited authority to do what is necessary to make it happen?

Hey Fucked Fart.........you apparently haven't been watching the news. BP and Cheney had secret White House meetings. Most of what the MMA did was remove restrictions in oil.

And remember..........Cheney and Bush Jr. were both oil men.

Am I interested in stopping the leak? Yes, but what I'd really like to know is why the fuck the cleanup technology is the same as what it was 40 years ago? It's not like there haven't been oil spills.

Let's also talk about the dead guy we were supposed to call in case of emergency, who was listed AS AN EXPERT TO CALL who DIED 5 YEARS BEFORE THE APPLICATION WAS WRITTEN!

Wanna talk about the inspection sheets written on in pencil and traced over in pen by BP officials?

How about the impact on the walrus that drilling in the Gulf of Mexico would have? Guess what? There are NO WALRUS in the Gulf of Mexico.

Wanna keep going in defending this fucked up slip shod corner cutting asshole company?

 

[my2¢]

I view folks seeking BP's bankruptcy pretty much the same as those folks who wished to see G.M. go complete out of business and have the government dole out unemployment checks rather than backing payroll checks.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know........when Toyota fucked up, everyone was after their asses.

Toyota is a foreign company. So is BP. Why the fuck are you defending BP, because you've got stock?

 

[Foxfyre]

I view folks seeking BP's bankruptcy pretty much the same as those folks who wished to see G.M. go complete out of business and have the government dole out unemployment checks rather than backing payroll checks.

The difference though is that the bailout to GM has cost the taxpayer and continues to cost the taxpayer many billions more than those unemployment checks would have been. And GM paid into the system for the unemployment insurance too. It wasn't that honorable people want to see anybody go broke. But we didn't want to own an automobile company either that will continue to drain national reserves funded by our tax dollars while we'll never see any return on our money. Remember the bailout was to prevent the bankruptcy which would be 'disastrous' they said. But the bankruptcy happened anyway. No disaster. Just business as usual but the fiscal insanity continues.

We aren't looking to bail BP out. But we will look to BP money to plug the hole and finance the cleanup. It makes no sense whatsoever to weaken BP financially before they do that and thus dump it all on the taxpayer.

 

[Foxfyre]

Who heard President Obama speak on the BP matter tonight?

I felt my jaw tighteneing and my fists clinching as it became more and more obvious he will continue to mismanage both the leak and the cleanup, but he is hell bent on using it as an excuse to ram Cap & Tax right on through. And it was obvious that he doesn't have a clue what to do there either, but just like the healthcare overhaul, he intends to through hundreds of billions at the wall and claim that it is the solution to the problem.

 

[my2¢]

I view folks seeking BP's bankruptcy pretty much the same as those folks who wished to see G.M. go complete out of business and have the government dole out unemployment checks rather than backing payroll checks.

The difference though is that the bailout to GM has cost the taxpayer and continues to cost the taxpayer many billions more than those unemployment checks would have been. And GM paid into the system for the unemployment insurance too. It wasn't that honorable people want to see anybody go broke. But we didn't want to own an automobile company either that will continue to drain national reserves funded by our tax dollars while we'll never see any return on our money. Remember the bailout was to prevent the bankruptcy which would be 'disastrous' they said. But the bankruptcy happened anyway. No disaster. Just business as usual but the fiscal insanity continues.

We aren't looking to bail BP out. But we will look to BP money to plug the hole and finance the cleanup. It makes no sense whatsoever to weaken BP financially before they do that and thus dump it all on the taxpayer.

I understand the differences but what I was addressing was the subject of people wanting to cut their own throats through harming business. Your reply with comment about GM being a continual drain on national reserve is what I see as a prime example of that and puts you in the same league with the anti-BP crowd. With 61% of stake in ownership, a great amount of money WILL be returned to the government when GM goes through with its stock offering, probably within a year.

 

[Foxfyre]

I view folks seeking BP's bankruptcy pretty much the same as those folks who wished to see G.M. go complete out of business and have the government dole out unemployment checks rather than backing payroll checks.

The difference though is that the bailout to GM has cost the taxpayer and continues to cost the taxpayer many billions more than those unemployment checks would have been. And GM paid into the system for the unemployment insurance too. It wasn't that honorable people want to see anybody go broke. But we didn't want to own an automobile company either that will continue to drain national reserves funded by our tax dollars while we'll never see any return on our money. Remember the bailout was to prevent the bankruptcy which would be 'disastrous' they said. But the bankruptcy happened anyway. No disaster. Just business as usual but the fiscal insanity continues.

We aren't looking to bail BP out. But we will look to BP money to plug the hole and finance the cleanup. It makes no sense whatsoever to weaken BP financially before they do that and thus dump it all on the taxpayer.

I understand the differences but what I was addressing was the subject of people wanting to cut their own throats through harming business. Your reply with comment about GM being a continual drain on national reserve is what I see as a prime example of that and puts you in the same league with the anti-BP crowd. With 61% of stake in ownership, a great amount of money WILL be returned to the government when GM goes through with its stock offering, probably within a year.

If the US gets some money back from GM, that would be good. But why should taxpayer money be put at risk to 'save' a private business in the first place? Where is the Constitutional authority for something like that? Especially when the odds of benefitting from the investment are not that good. Few of the problems that put GM at risk in the first place have been corrected. And with the USA being the primary stockholder, there is ever more 'justification' to keep funneling money into it to 'protect our 'investment'. You can translate that to 'protect the union'. And especially when any repaid TARP monies are viewed by this Administration are not repaid to the treasury but are seen by this Administration as a kind of giant petty cash fund that can be allocated to other things. But that's a subject for another hread.

Recognizing the situation we have with GM is not 'cutting our throat' any more than recognizing BP's responsibility in the Gulf crisis is 'cutting our throat'.

In both cases, demonstrating for the failure of either to punish them is the height of short sightedness and stupidity.