Republican Congressman Apologizes to BP?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
MrJayremmie

MrJayremmie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
3,438
Likes
27
Points
48
Unbelievable. Talk about being on the dick of giant corps.

The comments on this article say it all (at the end).

Rep. Barton apologizes to BP for Obama 'shakedown'
Well, that was fast. Barely 10 minutes into Thursday's landmark congressional testimony — where BP CEO Tony Hayward and other leading company executives are revisiting the Gulf Coast oil spill before a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee — the first controversial statement has entered the record.

[The latest coverage of the hearings, updated continuously throughout the day, is available from the Associated Press and from Reuters.]

And no, it didn't come from the gaffe-prone BP brass. Instead, GOP Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the ranking member on the House Energy Committee, made a decisive splash in his opening remarks (from which Republican leaders immediately began distancing themselves). A staunch conservative who has a long record of backing oil industry interests, Barton apologized to BP CEO Tony Hayward for the "shakedown" the Obama White House pulled on the company. (Barton has received more than $1.5 million in campaign donations from the oil industry, according to Open Secrets, a nonpartisan watchdog group.) You can watch the video here — the apology begins at the 1:45 mark:





"I'm not speaking for anybody in the House of Representatives but myself," Barton explained, "but I'm ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday. I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown. In this case a $20 billion shakedown."

[Photos: Obama meets with BP executives]

Wrapping up, Barton said: "I apologize. I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, is subject to some sort of political pressure that is, again, in my words — amounts to a shakedown, so I apologize."

— Brett Michael Dykes is a national affairs writer for Yahoo! News.
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts2660
 
House Energy Committee member, Joe Barton, completed his apology with "I'm already wearing the assless chaps you asked for, sir."
Click to expand...

I thought this part was pretty bizarre. He's going to be disciplined for saying something like that during a hearing.
 
Just to bring the opposing viewpoint here (not my viewpoint, mind you, since I'm not familiar enough with the Obama-BP discussions to render an opinion)--these comments intrigued me:

He wasn't talking about BP not being held accountable. He was talking about political pressure to pay vs. the due process of law and having experts give testimony to determine what the damages should be. Should they be held responsible? Yes. But there is no plan currently in place to direct the monies from the slush-fund. Barton's issue is with the improper method - and he was right to state that this was his opinion, not that of the GOP or the Congress. Guess what? - He has a right to his opinion, because this is America!
Click to expand...

Yes they did screw up. yes they should pay, yes they will pay. However the anointed one (obuma) may have just put a cap on how much they will have to pay.what happens when his extorted $20 billion runs out???? Think about it the court system would have gotten much much more. He was so quick to "make a deal" he shortchanged the citizens once again.
Click to expand...
 
As well he should. Just because BP deserves the blame doesn't mean that the Executive Branch of the US Government has the right to shake down private corporations and assign dollar values to civil liabilities.
 
How is it a shakedown? It's a slap on the wrist IMO.

This congressman is obviously ball washing BP , but I guess he's getting paid $1.5M to say "sorry." People have apologized for a lot less.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Just to bring the opposing viewpoint here (not my viewpoint, mind you, since I'm not familiar enough with the Obama-BP discussions to render an opinion)--these comments intrigued me:
Click to expand...

I'm not sure all the details have been made available. I highly doubt it's a $20B cap on this disaster BP caused. It's just a good starting point.


EDIT: I was right $20B is just the beginning of it. They are reporting total cost could reach $100B BP will need to pay.

"...an initial pledge of $20 billion dollars for that purpose"
 
I just saw this right after I posted the last post.

He is back tracking from his comments.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcnow/2010/06/gops-barton-retracts-apology-to-bp.html
“I want the record to be absolutely clear that I think BP is responsible for this accident, should be held responsible and should in every way do everything possible to make good on the consequences that have resulted from this accident. And if anything I have said this morning has been misconstrued in opposite effect, I want to apologize for that misconstruction.”

Barton was more direct in a statement issued in his name later: “I apologize for using the term "shakedown," and I retract my apology to BP.”
Click to expand...

It's interesting, earlier in the day some fellow republican leaders were asking him to step down from the energy committee he was on. He said he would not earlier this morning. I guess he saw the light.

In this article it quotes he received $1,447,880 in donations from individuals in the industry and its political action committees since 1989.
 
I'm not seeing how it's a shakedown either. The bigger thing to be afraid of is that the admin will make a deal with BP to get the money directly rather than paying it to folks that actually will suffer damages.
 
It's odd how a president can't win for losing. If he responds too slow, it's because he doesn't care or is incompetent. If he over-reacts (to some) to that little fact, he over-does it and is incompetent.

If he tries to hold those responsible, responsible, to other side (of his political fence) will defend those he is holding responsible.
Doesn't matter who the president is either. If the president "fines" a company (in this case, BP for 20 billion), it's too much. If he doesn't, it's not enough.

In some cases, it's justified. In others, it's not.

In this case, I think the some republicans are picking the wrong side of the argument to make. The more R's defend BP (or imply Obama has gone over the top with his choice here), the more the average voter will see that it's someone who is in bed with a special interest group.

It's crazy. I don't see how anyone can defend BP in this situation. They fucked up and deserve to pay for the fix.
 
MikeDC said:
I'm not seeing how it's a shakedown either. The bigger thing to be afraid of is that the admin will make a deal with BP to get the money directly rather than paying it to folks that actually will suffer damages.
Click to expand...

He didn't apologize for blaming BP. He apologized because the President sat in the oval office with the Attorney General (who will be heading up any criminal investigation) and bullied a private company that they needed to turn control of $20 billion over to the government, and basically denying everyone involved their right to due process.
 
julius said:
It's odd how a president can't win for losing. If he responds too slow, it's because he doesn't care or is incompetent. If he over-reacts (to some) to that little fact, he over-does it and is incompetent.

If he tries to hold those responsible, responsible, to other side (of his political fence) will defend those he is holding responsible.
Doesn't matter who the president is either. If the president "fines" a company (in this case, BP for 20 billion), it's too much. If he doesn't, it's not enough.

In some cases, it's justified. In others, it's not.

In this case, I think the some republicans are picking the wrong side of the argument to make. The more R's defend BP (or imply Obama has gone over the top with his choice here), the more the average voter will see that it's someone who is in bed with a special interest group.

It's crazy. I don't see how anyone can defend BP in this situation. They fucked up and deserve to pay for the fix.
Click to expand...

It's not about defending BP. It's about the Executive Branch denying a private company due process. BP can pay this twenty billion, and still be held liable in a civil action for paying the same damages.
 
BlazerWookee said:
He didn't apologize for blaming BP. He apologized because the President sat in the oval office with the Attorney General (who will be heading up any criminal investigation) and bullied a private company that they needed to turn control of $20 billion over to the government, and basically denying everyone involved their right to due process.
Click to expand...

well right now, BP is putting a cap on claims against them at 5k$ and also decides to change some claims down, yet never decides to bring claims up. The main point for the quick grab of money is that the people whose paycheck was from fishing are suddenly hosed, and need some sort of immediate temporary assistance until their full claims can be sorted out.
 
julius said:
It's odd how a president can't win for losing. If he responds too slow, it's because he doesn't care or is incompetent. If he over-reacts (to some) to that little fact, he over-does it and is incompetent.

If he tries to hold those responsible, responsible, to other side (of his political fence) will defend those he is holding responsible.
Doesn't matter who the president is either. If the president "fines" a company (in this case, BP for 20 billion), it's too much. If he doesn't, it's not enough.

In some cases, it's justified. In others, it's not.

In this case, I think the some republicans are picking the wrong side of the argument to make. The more R's defend BP (or imply Obama has gone over the top with his choice here), the more the average voter will see that it's someone who is in bed with a special interest group.

It's crazy. I don't see how anyone can defend BP in this situation. They fucked up and deserve to pay for the fix.
Click to expand...

We've spent well over $20T over the last 10 years alone and govt. looks helpless and to place blame instead of solving the crisis.

I don't expect them to solve much of anything, but to create crises, so ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top