Obama demands/gets $20Billion + public apology from BP

[Old Rocks]

So says the fellow with a garbage can for a hat.

 

[Old Rocks]

Quite an accomplishment.

Obama announces BP's $20B compensation fund - USATODAY.com

What a beautiful red herring Obama has pitched out to the public. Talk tough about making a company pay that already agreed to pay and perhaps the public will be so enthralled that they won't notice the black goop dripping off the pelicans. Perhaps Obama can now take some time to figure out how to get a coordinated effort going to clean up the damned oil.

Sure, and Exxon claimed they would pay, also. And better than a decade later, after going all the way to the Supreme Court, payed pennies on the dollar, and avoided much of even that, because over 8000 of the people involved had died.

What the President did was to insure that there would be a timely source of compensation for those whose livihood was damaged by BP's criminal negligence. Did so quickly, and without having to resort to the courts.

 

[Old Rocks]

Oh look Sangha's significant other has shown up........

You better get a game quick, MFer ...

true...A15 likes to gang bang those who dare question his poster friends

My, my. When losing a debate, these wingnuts like to immediatly ascribe homosexuality to the posters that handing them their ass. All the while assuming the Craig Wide Stance

 

[Zona]

All this crap...it comes down to this...CONHOG...bp volunteered the 20 billion after Obama suggested they do.

Its not like they said no, then Obama went after them. I admit, they had to say yes and they did.

Its a win, win situation and for anyone to say they are sorry for BP...well, they are just idiots. (Or republicans it seems).

 

[Contumacious]

Not seeing where Obama got anything that wasn't already promised by BP. BP said they would pay for the spill. BP has already apoligized.

Just more WH spin to try to change Obama's poor image.

Exactly.

The WH is merely grandstanding in order to ensure that Obama is not a one term Prez.

.

 

[sangha]

Well, I'm not a fascist barking airhead....but, I'll give you an answer anyway....

Obama is demanding something that a law has already established a limit on. 75 million...What do you think would happen if BP said no to any figure above that? I mean really...what would happen?

There is no such law.

If conservatives didn't make stuff up, they'd have nothing to say

I expect Congress would immediately pen a new 1500 page law that would be passed overnight to change the rules. That part is what bothers me...

Conservatives hate democracy.

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

 

[sangha]

You better get a game quick, MFer ...

true...A15 likes to gang bang those who dare question his poster friends

My, my. When losing a debate, these wingnuts like to immediatly ascribe homosexuality to the posters that handing them their ass. All the while assuming the Craig Wide Stance

Yep. As soon as I made it clear that conjob is a moron for thinking "innocent until proven guilty" applies in a civil, he announced he's given up, and started making his homophobic remarks. He's almost as obsessed with homosexuality as he is obsessed with me.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There is no such law.

If conservatives didn't make stuff up, they'd have nothing to say



Conservatives hate democracy.

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

 

[sangha]

Reposting on the off chance that conjob will acquire the testicles to defend his own foolish posts

You're a fool.

1) How will concentrating on the clean up make anyone suffer? You think a criminal investigation is necessary to get those people help? It obviously isn't.

If you ignore the people who are losing their jobs, then they will suffer. You support ignoring them.



Actually, they get fined all the times for violations even when there aren't any leaks. In fact, BP received more of these fines than any of its competitors in the industry

And again, since it takes a while to sink in, no one but you is saying the negligence is criminal. Remember? You gave that song and dance about "innocent until proven guilty" because you mistakenly thought that we were talking about criminal activity even though we clearly accused them of negligence which is a civil matter.

Or did you forget about your own words? How convenient.




So what? Even if this were true, which it's not, this is just another attempt by you to distract attention from your mistakes. You foolishly argued that the constitution requires "innocence until proven guilty" in deciding negligence, which is a civil issue.

If "negligent manslaughter" becomes an issue, it doesn't change the fact that the negligence BP perpetrated BEFORE the explosion, and the effect it has on the liability cap, is still a civil matter.

Remember? We were talking about the liability cap. Surely you didn't forget about that also. How very convenient.

But please, feel free to post the criminal violations they are being accused of committing through their neglect.......................

Once again, we have been clear in accusing BP of civil violations resulting from BP's negligence which are a civil matter. It was *YOU* who is being the fool and insisting negligence is a criminal matter.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Its a win, win situation and for anyone to say they are sorry for BP...well, they are just idiots.

Which is why I don't understand why people are complaining about this. It's win win. Why is this a political remark, let alone a bad one, about the president?

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

I'm pretty sure when a guilty party willingly forks over a large sum of money, they themselves determined it was an accident, they have no way of suggesting otherwise, and they'd be screwed if they tried to argue it. So BP determined it.

 

[txlonghorn]

There is no such law.

If conservatives didn't make stuff up, they'd have nothing to say



Conservatives hate democracy.

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

you twist everything. you start out vague and then try to circle back around to make a point. And in the end, you claim a victory when in fact the only point you've proven is that you're a spin doctor.

I'm STILL... S T I L L .... waiting for you to prove the negligence. I don't want your list of could be's. You talk a big game, like you know everything. But you don't. You speculate just like every other schmuck on here.

So until you can send me to a link that backs up your claims that negligence HAS indeed been proven and the 75 MM cap is removed, you have nothing I need. Especially your opinions of who's right and who's wrong. You haven't proven you're right yet. I'm sure you'll find some other bend in the wording to try to support your weak position, but keep it to yourself. Because without providing what I have asked for multiple times, it doesn't mean shit.

 

[txlonghorn]

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

apparently Sangha has

 

[NYcarbineer]

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

Apparently BP did when they agreed to put up the money.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Hey, BP is a foreign company, and according to the Supreme Court companies are 'persons'.

So BP doesn't have constitutional rights, at least according to the conservatives who keep telling us that foreigners don't have constitutional rights.

 

[txlonghorn]

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

Apparently BP did when they agreed to put up the money.

Well, that settles it then I guess...they should call off the investigation.

 

[sangha]

Didn't say it huh?

Shut the fuck up you lying asshole

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

you twist everything. you start out vague and then try to circle back around to make a point. And in the end, you claim a victory when in fact the only point you've proven is that you're a spin doctor.

I'm STILL... S T I L L .... waiting for you to prove the negligence. I don't want your list of could be's. You talk a big game, like you know everything. But you don't. You speculate just like every other schmuck on here.

So until you can send me to a link that backs up your claims that negligence HAS indeed been proven and the 75 MM cap is removed, you have nothing I need. Especially your opinions of who's right and who's wrong. You haven't proven you're right yet. I'm sure you'll find some other bend in the wording to try to support your weak position, but keep it to yourself. Because without providing what I have asked for multiple times, it doesn't mean shit.

I'm still waiting for you acknowledge what a dope you were for saying the cap was for 75mm and completely forgetting about the exceptions. To make it even dumber, even after I posted the exception, you still didn't understand that the cap didn't apply to negligence.

You also asked for examples of negligence, and when I gave them your response was that you don't give a damn. Since you don't give a damn about the answers to your questions, I won't bother answering them

When you demonstrate some honesty, and admit to your mistakes, then I might answer your questions. Until then, you're not just an idiot; you're also dishonest

 

[sangha]

Who determined that the accident was an act of negligence?

Apparently BP did when they agreed to put up the money.

Well, that settles it then I guess...they should call off the investigation.

Nope. We're going to give out the money AND continue the investigation. We might even start a few additional investigations, just to piss the wingnuts off. If you don't like it, you could always pray the cowardly conservatives in congress will find the balls to do something about it.

But I wouldnt hold my breath if I were (*shudder*) you

 

[txlonghorn]

Learn to read. I said there is no law which caps liability at 75mm and I was right. In cases of negligence, there is no cap.

you twist everything. you start out vague and then try to circle back around to make a point. And in the end, you claim a victory when in fact the only point you've proven is that you're a spin doctor.

I'm STILL... S T I L L .... waiting for you to prove the negligence. I don't want your list of could be's. You talk a big game, like you know everything. But you don't. You speculate just like every other schmuck on here.

So until you can send me to a link that backs up your claims that negligence HAS indeed been proven and the 75 MM cap is removed, you have nothing I need. Especially your opinions of who's right and who's wrong. You haven't proven you're right yet. I'm sure you'll find some other bend in the wording to try to support your weak position, but keep it to yourself. Because without providing what I have asked for multiple times, it doesn't mean shit.

I'm still waiting for you acknowledge what a dope you were for saying the cap was for 75mm and completely forgetting about the exceptions. To make it even dumber, even after I posted the exception, you still didn't understand that the cap didn't apply to negligence.

You also asked for examples of negligence, and when I gave them your response was that you don't give a damn. Since you don't give a damn about the answers to your questions, I won't bother answering them

When you demonstrate some honesty, and admit to your mistakes, then I might answer your questions. Until then, you're not just an idiot; you're also dishonest

well, I guess you lose...twice. Because you won't get any admission from me over that stupid ass shit and you can't back up your claim and prove the negligence you keep insisting is there.

Later loser

 

[txlonghorn]

Apparently BP did when they agreed to put up the money.

Well, that settles it then I guess...they should call off the investigation.

Nope. We're going to give out the money AND continue the investigation. We might even start a few additional investigations, just to piss the wingnuts off. If you don't like it, you could always pray the cowardly conservatives in congress will find the balls to do something about it.

But I wouldnt hold my breath if I were (*shudder*) you

"WE'RE"? Are you part of this administration? Or is that your delusional fantasy? You could apply for position of Obama's shoe shine boy. I'm sure he needs a good spit shine every now and then.... If you know something about golf, you might have a shot at being his caddy...since he plays more golf than anything, you'd be plenty busy.

Ummm...question. Why isn't BP allowed to distribute the money THEY are paying out....oh yeah, that's right...BO took that over too. Damn he's ambitious! Love's the dollar doesn't he? Mmmmmhhmmmm!! Yes indeed I do believe he does love them Benjamins!

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I'm STILL... S T I L L .... waiting for you to prove the negligence. I don't want your list of could be's. You talk a big game, like you know everything. But you don't. You speculate just like every other schmuck on here.

BP has already admitted negligence, not only by agreeing to pay, but also explicitly:
Field Notes - BP exec admits clean-up technology is dated
"BP acknowledged in a recent letter that it has routinely failed to comply with a federal regulation requiring drilling companies to certify that their blowout preventers are able to block a runaway well."
FT.com / World - BP ?not prepared? for deep-water spill
BP Admits to Being “Not Prepared” (”Low Odds” Fallacy Edition) naked capitalism

They literally signed the name of a man who was dead for five years as the person over-viewing their disaster plan. I REPEAT: THE MAN IN CHARGE OF THEIR DISASTER PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ALIVE FOR YEARS.

What more proof do you want?

Well, that settles it then I guess...they should call off the investigation.

The investigations serve multiple purposes, including but not limited to exploring what happened for prevention, diagnoses, and possible ways to fix it.


Let's face it: Sangria completely proved you wrong on the $75M cap by showing the exception to the rule. You didn't even acknowledge that exception as true! For the first few responses you were pretending Sanga was just making it up! Now you acknowledge it's true and are so ignorant as to believe there's no negligence? Are you blind? Do you not actually know anything about how this happened in the first place?