This one looks like the (FREE MARKET WITH OUT RESTRICTION GROUP) don’t like it
Pitt, so you believe it is OK for the executive branch of our government to circumvent the judicial branch? You do realize that all branches are purposefully limited in the scope of their powers for a very important reason, right?
Are you a fan of fascism?
When I watched this guy speaking on the news, he reminded me of the part in The Godfather Pt. 2 when Senator Geary stands up in the middle of the Senate hearings involving Michael Corleone and he decried the whole affair as a slander against the Italian people and praises Corleone’s hospitality and so on.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Pitt, so you believe it is OK for the executive branch of our government to circumvent the judicial branch? You do realize that all branches are purposefully limited in the scope of their powers for a very important reason, right?
Are you a fan of fascism?[/quote]
Who is circumventing anything by being an advocate for the consumer. It would be like if you pay for something but do not get it , your local AG may contact the company and tell them give strong hold his merchandise or I wwill make your life miserable . If you people do not think this happens everyday then please tell me what planet you live on
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Pitt, so you believe it is OK for the executive branch of our government to circumvent the judicial branch? You do realize that all branches are purposefully limited in the scope of their powers for a very important reason, right?
Are you a fan of fascism?[/quote]
Who is circumventing anything by being an advocate for the consumer. It would be like if you pay for something but do not get it , your local AG may contact the company and tell them give strong hold his merchandise or I wwill make your life miserable . If you people do not think this happens everyday then please tell me what planet you live on[/quote]
The president (the executive branch) is circumventing the judicial branch (the courts, which you seem to have a problem with) by demanding settlement of complaints against the company. This is outside of the scope of his established authority. He has the authority and is bound by the duty of his office to enforce the rulings of the courts but does not have the authority to make these judgments himself.
It is not the president’s job to be a consumer advocate. The president is not the attorney general- that would be Eric Holder. The AG has the authority to enforce existing contracts, not force people or companies into new ones. This is a shakedown and it may be acceptable in your mind and in the business as usual DC political scene, it is far from constitutional.
BO has zero authority to demand anything of BP and I sincerely hope they fight him on this as it apparently needs to be established that the executive office is not judge, jury, and executioner nor is it “King of America”.
The “talking heads” have been driving me absolutely batshit crazy with “the President is circumventing his authority”; and “it’s not legal to (fill in the blanks) with a Private Corporation”; “I don’t want to live in an America…” (and yes…he did sound like he was defending Michael Corleone).
- BP did what it did, because at this point, its Board felt that it was in its best interest to do so. They didn’t have any legal pressure to do anything. And even if they did…they sure as hell weren’t worried about it. Legally, they could bury any claim until the last Brown Pelican and shrimp bed was gone and the oil began to threaten Little Rock.
The President AT WORST was a facilitator in reminding them of what was in their best interest. (I don’t have to remind you that these guys are HORRIBLE at PR. Hell…top execs were out yachting somewhere today. Did they think no one would find out?)
-
By facilitating the set up of a fund, affected residents of the Gulf are at least assured of getting some relief…and in a MUCH more timely manner than having any compensation tied up in the morass of Class Actions (which ultimately benefits the firms involved. Read about asbestos litigation, that has been ongoing since the 70’s…with little going to the actual victims).
-
Class Action Litigation (as far as I know) is not “off the table” for in the future. But as I’ve stated, history has proven that it will have little effect on helping those whom are actually suffering in the Gulf.
So…this is one case where “politics” (…OOOoooooo!!!) may have actually helped…at least a little…and a Corporation that has made one mistake after another was reminded that in this one case…opening their pocket book…just a little… to those suffering in the Gulf was in their best interest.
Mufasa
- It was in BP’s best interest to avoid the inevitable deluge of media attacks from the White House. Whether or not these attacks were founded in reality would be irrelevant, as this administration has repeatedly proven that they value slanted misrepresentations and sound bytes far more than accurate and realistic interpretations of the truth.
The fact that Obama spun the entire disaster as a platform for his environmental initiative as well as his public attack on the Supreme Court’s ruling re: campaign financing illustrate this perfectly.
Had BP refused to comply with Obama’s demands for the $20B escrow fund (which will inevitably be administrated by some of his “independent” “third party” buddies who will inevitably skim some off the top for themselves), and instead opted to handle payments in the same ways that other industrial disasters have (privately), Obama would be co-opting prime time network TV to tell everyone about how big bad BP wasn’t taking responsibility, regardless of the truth of the matter.
- Have you ever seen how companies handle compensation for disasters like this? Armies of adjusters and lawyers come to an area and spend MONTHS writing checks. This is exactly what happened when a Norfolk/Southern train carrying chlorine gas derailed near my home town several years ago. Within 2 weeks, they had set up a local office that was open 12 hours/day, 5 days/week, for TWO YEARS.
The assumption that BP would even let this go to class-action is somewhat stupid. That is not a case they would win, and they know it. Fighting it in the courts would leave them vulnerable to punitive damages. It is in their best interest to settle without the intervention of the courts. These out of court settlements also keep people from double dipping and receiving settlement payments AND filing suit in the courts.
- The fact that class action litigation is not off the table means that BP could possibly paying the same people twice for the same thing. I know it’s emotionally satisfying to hate BP and want to make them pay as much as possible, but it is important to remember that BP is not some inhuman monster, BP employs thousands of people and BP’s stock comprises a large portion of many people’s investment portfolios, world-wide.
This includes millions of pensioners in England who will be equally fucked as those in the Gulf, having lost the source of a large percentage of their income if BP stock tanks. Can you show me where “history has proven that it will have little effect on helping those who are actually suffering”?
BP needed no reminding. Before the president made his address, they had adjusters and lawyers in the region writing checks and paying people for damages. Stop acting like BP really needed BO to tell them to pay people for damages.
Once again, getting involved in something that wasn’t particularly his business in the first place when he wasn’t needed at all simply so he can play himself off as the savior of everything. This is the EXACT reason he decided to intervene. For Obama, this situation is more about the PR and political leverage for his environmental initiatives than it is about the people suffering in the gulf.
Because of this, “politics” have not actually helped, since there is no doubt in any rational person’s mind that BP would have been jumping through hoops to make things right without the president’s intervention. What you have now is people have been shown time and time again to be corrupt getting their fingers in the pot that is supposed to be for those affected by the spill.
You have a private corporation being bent to the political will of the president because of his continued willingness to lie to the American public in order to generate political leverage. You have a horrible disaster that is going to permanently alter the lives of millions being spun and cheapened in order to push Obama’s otherwise legless environmental initiatives.
Eh, BP volunteered to do it. Doesn’t matter what Obama said, in the end BP decided to do this. With 'ole BP Hayward racing his Yacht while our fisherman are grounded, I wouldn’t protest too much.
Some thoughts.
-
This diaster currently has the potential to be the worst environmental disaster ever, both in it’s short term and long term effects. There is nothing to even begin to compare it to.
-
With such a disaster; in your mind, what exactly should be the response of the President?
First, the talking heads say he wasn’t involved enough…now it too much and its all been politicized in order to “push” his agenda.
What would have been the “acceptable” response?
-
Maybe I’m being affected by the “MSM”…but even FOX has shown that the residents of the Gulf have been mired in red tape, delays and bureaucracy.
-
We will certainly “agree to disagree” on Corporations and their ability to eventually “do the right thing”, without either a) public outcry and/or b) political pressure. And even in those cases, they will often still act in their own “best” interest. (At least within the pervue of their own often limited “world-view”).
That’s okay…they are businesses, not charities or environmental stewards.
And politicians are politicians.
- The stock of BP, and it’s effect on its workers, pensions, etc…is because of it’s own reckless behavior (based on all we know from survivors of the “Deep Water Horizon”…)…not because of any action of the President.
This is no “touchy-feely…punish the bad guys” thing on my part…or some desire on my part to have windmills in my back yard. But I’m also not going to “diffuse” blame and become a Corporate apologist.
Bottom line?
BP, TransAtlantic and Halliburton fucked up…big time.
Mufasa
And interestingly enough…
Other Oil Executives essentially agree with that assessment.
Mufasa
- This is not particularly relative to the discussion, but you folks are awful short sighted on your history. Perhaps the greatest ecological disaster of the twenty-first century, but its not even the largest oil spill in US history:
-
The talking heads might have been talking about how he had NO initial response to the spill. Remember he wouldn’t sign a waiver of the Jones act so that foreign ships could help with the cleanup. Justifying his actions by saying “well, the media would have killed him if he didn’t do that” is sort of like saying “well, the house needed cleaning so I burnt it down”.
-
http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/gulf_oil_spill/bp-paying-millions-in-gulf-coast-claims
Dated June 6, 2010
-
Refer back to my response to number 3. BP had paid out 48 million and nearly half of the claims it hard received before BO got involved. Those pesky facts. Demonizing BP is good for BO, “You can’t trust those evil businesses. They just want to make money. Don’t worry though… I’m from the government, and you can trust me.”
-
Please indicate to me where I said BP should not be held responsible? I simply stated that what BO is doing is setting up BP to be the object of a great deal of milking and profiteering by those who do not rightfully deserve compensation. This 1) hurts those affected by the spill and 2) hurts those depending on BP in some way for their own livelihood.
Holding BP responsible is not within the authority of the executive branch and you have Dems in congress making statements to the press about how they will pass ex post facto legislation to grant the BO the necessary authority.
The fact that you are essentially endorsing this sort of behavior makes it pretty apparent that you are more interested in punishing BP than actually helping the victims.
You couldn’t possibly be a corporate apologist, you’re too busy bending over backwards to make every asinine thing our president does seem somewhat acceptable.
Ah, the Internet!
You can just about be assured that the discussion is going no where when people start a) saying that people said something that they didn’t say and b) resort to personal attacks.
There is no reasonable person who could read what I wrote and say legitimately that I care more about the President than the people of the Gulf.
And you better look in the mirror and give careful thought about who is “bending over backwards” for who.
I’m glad that you feel BP, TransAtlantic and Halliburton are such great Corporate citizens, whose greatest concern is for the people and habitat of the Gulf.
I don’t…and neither do the people out of Jobs; whose Lifestyle is destroyed; and who with each passing day are covered more and more in oil.
Mufasa
I have done no so such thing. Show me where I have put words in your mouth? So far, the only one doing that is you, as you have made the implications that I am a corporate apologist and that I am bending over backwards for these businesses, despite statements I have made to the contrary. You are reading selectively.
I have made no personal attacks, merely responded to your suggestion that I am a corporate apologist with the suggestion that perhaps, you are an Obama apologist.
I have supported my statements with facts. FACT: BP was in the region writing checks weeks before Obama decided he needed to get involved. Your entire argument rests soundly on the premise that the people in the Gulf would not be duely compensated without Obama swooping in to save the day and that is clearly NOT the case. You ARE bending over backwards to defend what is little more than a blatant and tasteless political move.
Riddle me this, oh wise one. If this situation was really about the people losing their livelihoods in the Gulf, then why did Obama spend most of his address to the nation the other night on a tangent about his environmental initiatives?
Here’s another riddle: If BP wasn’t going to do the right thing and sack up and pay for damages without BO sticking his nose in and showing that big evil corporationy corporation who’s boss, then why were they in the region writing checks weeks before Bam Bam decided he needed to save the day? I saw reports of 18,000 claims filled by June 6 totaling $48 million and a report of total claims filled of somewhere in the $35 million range during the last week of May.
I don’t know how noble this is, but this story is burnin me out. I don’t mean that isn’t every bit as bad as it is or even that it’s being over covered. It’s just burnin me out. It’s like lemme know when something changes. I dunno.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t know how noble this is, but this story is burnin me out. I don’t mean that isn’t every bit as bad as it is or even that it’s being over covered. It’s just burnin me out. It’s like lemme know when something changes. I dunno. [/quote]
I agree. They have slowed the flow, maybe not to the point it should be but it is slowing. I want to know when something changes.