5
   

Joe Barton, Republican asshole of the day

 
 
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 12:50 pm
This piece of **** is actually apologizing to BP for the fact that they've agreed to pay $20 billion to help clean up their mess and compensate the people who have been screwed over by the oil spill. he calls it a shakedown. Is it any wonder why people think Republicans from Texas are all assholes?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_texas_rep_joe_barton_apologizes_to_bp_ceo_tony_hayward_over_white_houses_20_bill.html

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dL5FkkHm9uI/0.jpg
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 5 • Views: 3,648 • Replies: 43

 
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 12:53 pm
Oil has contributed something like $1.5 mil. to his campaign. He's groveling like a worm in hope of getting more.
Cycloptichorn
 
  7  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 12:55 pm
The GOP is really in a bind here on their messaging. They don't know whether to take the populist angle and attack Obama for not doing more, or protect their corporate and oil interests by attacking Obama for doing too much.

I think mostly they will make themselves look like the fools they are, as they simultaneously blame the gov't for lax regulations - while still attacking strict regulations in this and other industries. They'll blame the gov't for not getting on top of the cleanup fast enough, while still complaining the gov't is 'too big.' All of their messages are contradictory.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  5  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 12:55 pm
This from pdiddie's blog:
... I apologize for Joe Barton. He is as venal and corrupt as a Texas Republican comes. And since he is so "ashamed" and "doesn't want to live in a country" where we hold corporations responsible for their mistakes, then I invite his sorry ass to GTF OUT of MY country.
Krumple
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:08 pm
@edgarblythe,
Once again this wasn't BP's fault. It was the governments fault.

Those parts that were used, are required by law to be inspected by the government once a month. Not only that but the manufacturing of the parts is also required to pass government inspections. The government certified the parts and also passed their inspections. Yet the failure is BP's fault? Why? If the government says the parts are good and they are passing their monthly inspections, then why is it BP's fault when they fail? If the parts were faulty it was the governments responsibility to determine that, since they were the one's who said BP had to have certified parts. But like usual the government has done a fantastic job of redirecting the blame onto the corporation and will inevitably get the people to think more government is needed so problems like this won't happen in the future. It's a perfect plan for government to get more control, more power, but also being the one who caused the problem to start with. They forced BP out into deeper waters because there is a ban on shallow water drilling.

Government win win, corporation loss and government was behind it all along.
kuvasz
 
  2  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:17 pm
@kickycan,
I hope BP Joe goes the same way as the villain from the James Bond film Quantum of Solace; a quart of oil in his belly and a bullet in his head.

btw; your title is redundant.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  4  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:19 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:

Once again this wasn't BP's fault. It was the governments fault.

Those parts that were used, are required by law to be inspected by the government once a month. Not only that but the manufacturing of the parts is also required to pass government inspections. The government certified the parts and also passed their inspections. Yet the failure is BP's fault? Why? If the government says the parts are good and they are passing their monthly inspections, then why is it BP's fault when they fail? If the parts were faulty it was the governments responsibility to determine that, since they were the one's who said BP had to have certified parts. But like usual the government has done a fantastic job of redirecting the blame onto the corporation and will inevitably get the people to think more government is needed so problems like this won't happen in the future. It's a perfect plan for government to get more control, more power, but also being the one who caused the problem to start with. They forced BP out into deeper waters because there is a ban on shallow water drilling.

Government win win, corporation loss and government was behind it all along.


Is this a sick joke of some sort? I can't tell if you are being sarcastic here or not.

Suffice it to say that you are completely and totally wrong, sir, and quite uninformed as to the actual facts of the situation.

Cycloptichorn
wandeljw
 
  6  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:39 pm
Quote:
Top Corporate Donor to Barton Is Partner of BP on Deepwater Horizon
(by Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight.com, June 17, 2010)

Ordinarily, it's not that shocking to see a Republican from Texas defend the petroleum industry. But Rep. Joe Barton's comments to BP CEO Tony Hayward today, in which he described it as a "tragedy" that a "a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown", has obviously touched something of a raw nerve, with Republicans already seeking to distance themselves from the comment while Democrats look for ways to exploit it.

Making matters worse for Barton is the identity of the top contributor to his election campaigns. Since 1989, it has been the company Anadarko Petroleum, from which he's received $56,500 in PAC donations and another $90,000 in individual contributions.

Anadarko has been making a lot of news lately, and none of it is good: they're a 25 percent partner in the Macondo Prospect, which was the site of the Deepwater Horizon explosion that is causing oil to spill into the Gulf of Mexico. Anadarko has also been sent a bill by BP and asked to pay its share of the cleanup costs.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  3  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:59 pm
Rachel Maddow had some good advice for politicians like Barton;

Before you say anything, google yourself.

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  8  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 03:20 pm
Quote:
GOP is really in a bind here on their messaging. They don't know whether to take the populist angle and attack Obama for not doing more, or protect their corporate and oil interests by attacking Obama for doing too much
OOOOH that there is something humorous in this tragedy. What'd they call that mule who was standing between two bales of rich hay and starved to death cause he couldnt make up his mind
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  7  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 04:41 pm
I guess there are two Republican assholes of the day today.

Another Republican, Representative Tom Price of Georgia, had said that the new $20 billion fund “suggests that the Obama administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics.”

Asshole #2....

http://www.yournews.com/copyroom/newsimages/TomPrice.jpg

I beseech everyone to remember the names and faces of these pieces of garbage come election day.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  6  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 04:44 pm
I have another question: Are there no ethical rules for these guys? I mean, Barton gets over $300,000 from big oil and then defends the fuckers after they cause the worst environmental disaster ever in the U.S.

Isn't there some rule about conflicts of interest, and is there any punishment? Or is our government set up so that once you're in you can basically get away with anything? Where the **** is the accountability? There needs to be a way to punish these dirty politicians for this kind of ****.
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 04:51 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Is this a sick joke of some sort? I can't tell if you are being sarcastic here or not.

Suffice it to say that you are completely and totally wrong, sir, and quite uninformed as to the actual facts of the situation.


Yeah I'm uninformed?

How about the fact that congress capped the insurance cost for BP to 70 million? Hmm, why would congress cap the insurance that BP would have to pay for potential disaster? Congress went a long with it, passed the resolution and BP didn't have to pay more than 70 million for insurance.

I guess i am just making all that up right. That I am misinformed.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 04:53 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Is this a sick joke of some sort? I can't tell if you are being sarcastic here or not.

Suffice it to say that you are completely and totally wrong, sir, and quite uninformed as to the actual facts of the situation.


Yeah I'm uninformed?


Yes, you are uninformed.

Quote:
How about the fact that congress capped the insurance cost for BP to 70 million?


What do you mean when you say 'insurance cost?' You do realize that this cap - which likely would not survive a legal challenge, btw - is only for indirect costs, not for the cleanup costs themselves, which are in fact uncapped?

Quote:
Hmm, why would congress cap the insurance that BP would have to pay for potential disaster? Congress went a long with it, passed the resolution and BP didn't have to pay more than 70 million for insurance.

I guess i am just making all that up right. That I am misinformed.


Yes, you are. You don't know what you are talking about.

Even more so, you seem to have this idea that the government was primarily responsible for safety and for following established drilling procedures on BP's rig. They most certainly are not, any more so than State governments are responsible for keeping your brakes on your car in good working order.

Cycloptichorn
edgarblythe
 
  5  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:04 pm
I suggest we make up a petition of apology to BP.

Dear BP
I appologize for our water getting into your oil. Never mind about the birds. We can stick plastic flamingoes out there once it is all over with. And the oil that gets in the sand, we can smear on our bodies and save on sunscreen costs. Once again: SORRY.
JPB
 
  5  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:08 pm
Quote:
A Texas Republican's apology to BP CEO Tony Hayward that the company had to agree to a $20 billion fund for oil spill damage claims nearly cost him a key House committee position on Thursday.

Rep. Joe Barton was forced to recant by House minority leaders outraged at the vision of an American lawmaker apologizing at a congressional hearing to a foreign head of a corporation that had caused great hardships for millions of Gulf Coast residents.


poor baby...
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:22 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
They most certainly are not, any more so than State governments are responsible for keeping your brakes on your car in good working order.


Well, they're a bit more responsible than that, Cy. There's been a good deal of talk about how cozy the regulators are with the oil companies.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:24 pm
@JPB,
Quote:
Rep. Joe Barton was forced to recant by House minority leaders outraged at the vision of an American lawmaker apologizing at a congressional hearing to a foreign head of a corporation that had caused great hardships for millions of Gulf Coast residents.


So much for freedom of expression.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:26 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
They most certainly are not, any more so than State governments are responsible for keeping your brakes on your car in good working order.


Well, they're a bit more responsible than that, Cy. There's been a good deal of talk about how cozy the regulators are with the oil companies.


Not really. The primary responsibility lies with the owner of the property. Regulators share some of the responsibility, but BP certainly cannot blame them for the errors in this case due to equipment they KNEW was faulty.

Part of the problem for BP here is that it wasn't just faulty equipment, it was a pattern of ignored warnings and dangerous decisions on their part. The equipment could have been faulty as hell and nothing would have gone wrong at all, if BP hadn't insisted on doing a rather rushed process at the end.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:31 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Even more so, you seem to have this idea that the government was primarily responsible for safety and for following established drilling procedures on BP's rig. They most certainly are not, any more so than State governments are responsible for keeping your brakes on your car in good working order.


Yeah the parts that were used, are required by law to be inspected by government officials monthly. They passed inspection, so why would BP be held responsible if the parts were defective? Shouldn't the inspectors have determined if the parts were defective or capable of handling operating depths?

Congress passed the issuance cap for BP it was prior to them even starting drilling. It is congresses fault for passing the insurance cap.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Joe Barton, Republican asshole of the day
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 06:49:11