So what should Obama have done?

[sangha]

What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job.

If he had been hired as a CEO of a major corporation rather than elected President and performed his job in the first 18 months at the same level as this, the Board of Directors would have fired his incompetent ass by now.

Just like BP fired their CEO, right?

Oh wait.....

 

[ConHog]

What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job.

If he had been hired as a CEO of a major corporation rather than elected President and performed his job in the first 18 months at the same level as this, the Board of Directors would have fired his incompetent ass by now.

Just like BP fired their CEO, right?

Oh wait.....

Please, oh please show me where I have said they shouldn't fire him.....

Oh, as for your stupid justice delayed justice denied statement. Well, that's just stupid, as is your analogy to the cops investigating a murder. Where the hell is BP going to go for the next however long it takes to get this mess cleaned up? I mean seriously, Obama has said THEY are in charge of the cleanup, so do you want the people who are in charge of this cleanup to be distracted by a civil litigation? I don't . I want them to have their full corporate attention on cleaning up this mess, then we'll worry about fines and who's going to pay what damages. I mean seriously do you think at all? Or just defend Obama no matter what he does?

Oh, and is it even possible for you to respond to a post without resorting to third grade name calling? No one will ever take you seriously if you can't (well too late for you to earn respect on here I know but just some helpful advice for life.)

 

[sangha]

18 USC Section 600:

Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity




Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

There is nothing that says it has to be a paying job. I see an epic fail on your part Sangha

When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you

Hmmm.. You might want to read that again so you don't seem clueless.
Just sayin'

Boy are you dumb. The law is right in front of you, and you're still confused

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit,provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress,

or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit,

Whatever employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit must be provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress,

In written english language (maybe you'll learn it someday), a list of options are seperated by commas, with the last choice identified by an or. Therefore, "]Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit' is one clause and the 2nd clause ("provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress") applies to ALL of the options in the 1st clause.

 

[ConHog]

When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you

Hmmm.. You might want to read that again so you don't seem clueless.
Just sayin'

Boy are you dumb. The law is right in front of you, and you're still confused

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit,provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress,

or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit,

Whatever employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit must be provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress,

In written english language (maybe you'll learn it someday), a list of options are seperated by commas, with the last choice identified by an or. Therefore, "]Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit' is one clause and the 2nd clause ("provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress") applies to ALL of the options in the 1st clause.

Psst you better reread the part where it says you can't offer an appointment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about a paid appointment. Now let me ask you how does one go about getting on the President's Intelligence Advisory Board?

 

[sangha]

What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job.

If he had been hired as a CEO of a major corporation rather than elected President and performed his job in the first 18 months at the same level as this, the Board of Directors would have fired his incompetent ass by now.

Just like BP fired their CEO, right?

Oh wait.....

Please, oh please show me where I have said they shouldn't fire him.....

You didn't moron, which is why I didn't say you did. You'd know that if you could read with comprhension.

You stated that CEO's who perform poorly get fired

Like the CEO of BP. Or maybe you think he's doing a fine job.

Oh, as for your stupid justice delayed justice denied statement. Well, that's just stupid, as is your analogy to the cops investigating a murder.

As usual, you've got no argument, and no facts. You just repeat your whining and hope no one notices how you got nothing.

Where the hell is BP going to go for the next however long it takes to get this mess cleaned up?

It has nothing to do with BP "going" anywhere. Police collect evidence right away. They don't wait for the evidence to get destroyed and memories to fade. Only an idiot would think there is anything to gain from sitting around on your ass, which explains why it's your preference

I mean seriously, Obama has said THEY are in charge of the cleanup, so do you want the people who are in charge of this cleanup to be distracted by a civil litigation? I don't .

Whatever makes you think the investigation is going to have anything to do with the people who are in charge of the cleanup. No one is investigating the cleanup, blockhead. They're investigating the explosion that caused the leak, Einstein.

No one involved in the cleanup was at the scene of the explosion. No one involved in the cleanup will be "distracted" because they have no info to offer concerning the explosion. Only a dope like you would think otherwise.

But feel free to tell me what info the people doing the cleanup have to offer the investigation of the explosion. I can't wait to hear what you're going to make up

 

[sangha]

Whatever employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit must be provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress,

Psst you better reread the part where it says you can't offer an appointment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about a paid appointment. Now let me ask you how does one go about getting on the President's Intelligence Advisory Board?

Since reptition sometimes works with the stupid, I'll repeat:

Any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit

must be

provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress,

Paid or unpaid, the appointment must be:
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress,

 

[ConHog]

Just like BP fired their CEO, right?

Oh wait.....

Please, oh please show me where I have said they shouldn't fire him.....

You didn't moron, which is why I didn't say you did. You'd know that if you could read with comprhension.

You stated that CEO's who perform poorly get fired

Like the CEO of BP. Or maybe you think he's doing a fine job.



As usual, you've got no argument, and no facts. You just repeat your whining and hope no one notices how you got nothing.

Where the hell is BP going to go for the next however long it takes to get this mess cleaned up?

It has nothing to do with BP "going" anywhere. Police collect evidence right away. They don't wait for the evidence to get destroyed and memories to fade. Only an idiot would think there is anything to gain from sitting around on your ass, which explains why it's your preference

I mean seriously, Obama has said THEY are in charge of the cleanup, so do you want the people who are in charge of this cleanup to be distracted by a civil litigation? I don't .

Whatever makes you think the investigation is going to have anything to do with the people who are in charge of the cleanup. No one is investigating the cleanup, blockhead. They're investigating the explosion that caused the leak, Einstein.

No one involved in the cleanup was at the scene of the explosion. No one involved in the cleanup will be "distracted" because they have no info to offer concerning the explosion. Only a dope like you would think otherwise.

But feel free to tell me what info the people doing the cleanup have to offer the investigation of the explosion. I can't wait to hear what you're going to make up

WOW, you just really can't do it can you. Adult debate is just beyond your abilities.

But we'll try again. So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here? Otherwise , they would very much be involved in any investigation. Let's say COngress decides to have hearings to determine what went wrong, which they should, do you not think that maybe The CEO of BP along with most of his upper management team will be required to testify at some point? Do you not agree that if they are preparing for and attending Congressional hearings they probably are not going to be focusing on cleaning this mess up?

Stop talking about this like it's some sort of criminal investigation where the criminal might throw the murder weapon into the lake if the cops wait too long to get there, that isn't true and you know it. Or maybe you don't......

 

[sangha]

So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here?

Are you hallucinating? Where did I say that.

Otherwise , they would very much be involved in any investigation. Let's say COngress decides to have hearings to determine what went wrong, which they should, do you not think that maybe The CEO of BP along with most of his upper management team will be required to testify at some point? Do you not agree that if they are preparing for and attending Congressional hearings they probably are not going to be focusing on cleaning this mess up?

Wait a minute? You're actually stupid enough to think BP's CEO is personally directing the cleanup

BWHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!

Stop talking about this like it's some sort of criminal investigation where the criminal might throw the murder weapon into the lake if the cops wait too long to get there, that isn't true and you know it. Or maybe you don't......

Only in wingnut world is it impossible for a corporation, or one of it's employees, to destroy evidence, like memos and other documents.

You know it could happen. You just can't be honest about it.

 

[ConHog]

So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here?

Are you hallucinating? Where did I say that.

Otherwise , they would very much be involved in any investigation. Let's say COngress decides to have hearings to determine what went wrong, which they should, do you not think that maybe The CEO of BP along with most of his upper management team will be required to testify at some point? Do you not agree that if they are preparing for and attending Congressional hearings they probably are not going to be focusing on cleaning this mess up?

Wait a minute? You're actually stupid enough to think BP's CEO is personally directing the cleanup

BWHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!

Stop talking about this like it's some sort of criminal investigation where the criminal might throw the murder weapon into the lake if the cops wait too long to get there, that isn't true and you know it. Or maybe you don't......

Only in wingnut world is it impossible for a corporation, or one of it's employees, to destroy evidence, like memos and other documents.

You know it could happen. You just can't be honest about it.

Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.


I believe the bulk of the "evidence" was destroyed when the rig blew up. But if we're just talking about paperwork and such, yes of course BP COULD destroy it, but with the entire world's attention focused on them, do you really think they will be that stupid even if they wanted to?

Again , this was an accident, but an accident that BP will have to compensate people for, but oh they already announced they would , so why the big hurry to investigate? I'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."

 

[sangha]

Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.

Being responsible for something doesn't mean you actually do it, einstein

I believe the bulk of the "evidence" was destroyed when the rig blew up. But if we're just talking about paperwork and such, yes of course BP COULD destroy it, but with the entire world's attention focused on them, do you really think they will be that stupid even if they wanted to?

I believe you're stupid enough to think a criminal would just surrender the evidence that proves their guilt.

And I believe you're stupid enough to not realize that if a BP employee did something illegal, that individual might want to destroy that evidence without BP's knowledge.

Again , this was an accident,

Only a wingnut would come to a conclusion before the investigation.

but an accident that BP will have to compensate people for, but oh they already announced they would , so why the big hurry to investigate?

Only a wingnut, ignorant of the law as they are, would confuse civil penalties (ie compensation) with criminal penalties

'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."

And that's what really bugs you. Some people are going to get money from BP, and that burns you up.

Conservatives hate when others get something.

 

[Valerie]

Obama pressures BP in Gulf visit | Video | Reuters.com

 

[ConHog]

Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.

Being responsible for something doesn't mean you actually do it, einstein

I believe the bulk of the "evidence" was destroyed when the rig blew up. But if we're just talking about paperwork and such, yes of course BP COULD destroy it, but with the entire world's attention focused on them, do you really think they will be that stupid even if they wanted to?

I believe you're stupid enough to think a criminal would just surrender the evidence that proves their guilt.

And I believe you're stupid enough to not realize that if a BP employee did something illegal, that individual might want to destroy that evidence without BP's knowledge.



Only a wingnut would come to a conclusion before the investigation.

but an accident that BP will have to compensate people for, but oh they already announced they would , so why the big hurry to investigate?

Only a wingnut, ignorant of the law as they are, would confuse civil penalties (ie compensation) with criminal penalties

'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."

And that's what really bugs you. Some people are going to get money from BP, and that burns you up.

Conservatives hate when others get something.

Bahahahha more childish name calling from you.

I'm done with this argument. You are way too immature for me. You wouldn't acknowledge a point that you didn't agree with if it hit you in the head.

But, I do wonder this, you keep calling me a wingnut. I assume b/c you're under the misguided notion that I am a right winger, well I will tell you that simply isn't true; as I said in another thread, I have actually been called a liberal for many of my stances, oh and here's a shocker I voted for Bill Clinton twice and Dubya oh never. So you fail on that count also.

You are just a giant bucket of fail...... No wonder you worship Osama bin Spendalot.

 

[txlonghorn]

Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.

Being responsible for something doesn't mean you actually do it, einstein




I believe you're stupid enough to think a criminal would just surrender the evidence that proves their guilt.

And I believe you're stupid enough to not realize that if a BP employee did something illegal, that individual might want to destroy that evidence without BP's knowledge.



Only a wingnut would come to a conclusion before the investigation.



Only a wingnut, ignorant of the law as they are, would confuse civil penalties (ie compensation) with criminal penalties

'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."

And that's what really bugs you. Some people are going to get money from BP, and that burns you up.

Conservatives hate when others get something.

Bahahahha more childish name calling from you.

I'm done with this argument. You are way too immature for me. You wouldn't acknowledge a point that you didn't agree with if it hit you in the head.

But, I do wonder this, you keep calling me a wingnut. I assume b/c you're under the misguided notion that I am a right winger, well I will tell you that simply isn't true; as I said in another thread, I have actually been called a liberal for many of my stances, oh and here's a shocker I voted for Bill Clinton twice and Dubya oh never. So you fail on that count also.

You are just a giant bucket of fail...... No wonder you worship Osama bin Spendalot.

You are arguing with a brick wall....only this brick wall has less brains

 

[Meister]

I gave sangha credit for having the IQ of a pissant.....I overstated his IQ.

 

[Meister]

I see we have another soft on crime conservative who thinks criminals should be allowed to commit crimes without interference. I bet you think "Society made BP do it"

And you've got no idea about what Obama didn't do. All you can think of is "more photo ops".

Nope, you're not too partisan

I've been on this board less than a full 24 hours and you've already proven to me that you are the stupidest person to ever manage to draw a breath.

Where did I say they should NEVER assess legal blame or decide if someone was criminally negligent is this matter? Oh, that's right I didn't . Instead I said they should wait until after they get the leak stopped and the oil cleaned up THEN run any investigations necessary.

You are full of shit. Justice delayed is justice denied, and you want to delay an investigation

There's a reason why when someone is killed, the police don't hold off investigating until they clean up the blood, you moron

Your an idiot....your equating this to a murder? Have you heard about the first 48 in a murder....there is a reason for a quick investigation.
BP isn't going anywhere and will be around for a long time to deal with the legalities.....that are still ongoing. Your comprehension is minimal, sonny.

 

[Meister]

18 USC Section 600:

Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity




Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

There is nothing that says it has to be a paying job. I see an epic fail on your part Sangha

When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you

Reading and comprehending are not your friends, Sangha. I would be somewhat embarrassed if I were you, but your too ignorant to understand.

 

[ConHog]

I gave sangha credit for having th IQ of a pissant.....I overstated his IQ.

and insulted pissants everywhere. They demand an apology.

 

[ConHog]

18 USC Section 600:

Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity




Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

There is nothing that says it has to be a paying job. I see an epic fail on your part Sangha

When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you

Reading and comprehending are not your friends, Sangha. I would be somewhat embarrassed if I were you, but your too ignorant to understand.

He totally and completely ignored me correctly pointing out that the law makes it illegal to offer appointments , I wonder why?

 

[Meister]

When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you

Reading and comprehending are not your friends, Sangha. I would be somewhat embarrassed if I were you, but your too ignorant to understand.

He totally and completely ignored me correctly pointing out that the law makes it illegal to offer appointments , I wonder why?

A partisan hack will never look at or acknowledge the truth.

 

[American Horse]

What could they have done? They build bridges, dams, etc, They don't know about cleaning up oil

CLEAN UP THE OIL? How about stopping it?
The Corps of Engineers are collectively the foremost experts in hydrology and hydrological engineering. The problem in the gulf is mainly a combination of hydrocarbons (oil) and hydrology.

Great! Another idiot

The Corps of Engineers don't have the deep sea equipment, nor the experience to use it

The Corps of Engineers does much more than the things you mentioned. Besides being the best practical engineers in the world it is the foremost body in charge of designing and supervising the building of dikes all over the US. When a small geographical area is contaminated and threatens to expand to unaffected areas, the first prescription is to raise a dike around it to contain and control the affluent.

What kind of stupidity makes you think they can build a berm around the Gulf of Mexico?

Besides, berms don't stop leaks, and berms don't cleanup any oil. They just move the oil down to the next beach, and the first storm that hits destroys them, leaving more ecological damage

The idea is to reduce the harm, not create a 2nd disaster

I'm sorry to say that you don't have any practical knowledge of the material in my post and you seem to deliberately misconstrue the content of it, so I won't waste any more of my time on this thread.

I would recommend the same to any one else who by now likewise feels they are talking to a wall or an arrogant child