• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama lashes BP chief, media over oil disaster

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
by Stephen Collinson – 1 hr 44 mins ago
WASHINGTON (AFP) – President Barack Obama said he would fire BP CEO Tony Hayward for flippant comments and lashed out at media "talking heads," ratcheting up his rhetoric on the 50th day of the US oil disaster.
As Obama Tuesday sought to contain further political damage over the greatest environmental calamity in US history, his top disaster aide reported more progress capturing oil spewing from a ruptured undersea well.
Hayward, whose sardonic English tones and comments, including a prediction that the Gulf spill would be "very, very modest," have irked some Americans, found himself directly in Obama's cross-hairs.
"He wouldn't be working for me after making any of those statements," Obama said on the NBC "Today Show," after being criticized for what pundits said was a too tepid reaction to the disaster.
Hayward has since apologized for his remarks.
Obama revealed he had not spoken to Hayward, since an explosion on the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig on April 20, saying there would be little point.
"When you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he's going to say all the right things to me. I'm not interested in words. I'm interested in actions."
Obama lashes BP chief, media over oil disaster - Yahoo! News

Someone slap him, he's President of the USA, not CEO of the World.
 

Your Star

Rage More!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,246
Reaction score
19,931
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
He's not stating that he is in fact going to fire him. He's stating that if he was working for him, he would fire him.
You can't blame him for that.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,823
Reaction score
34,061
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Last edited:

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
He's not stating that he is in fact going to fire him. He's stating that if he was working for him, he would fire him.
You can't blame him for that.
It's not eh place of the US President to say something like that. The point is he's not being Presidential at all. It's okay for a Jr. House member to shoot of remarks like this, even a rookie Senator. Leader of the Freeworld? No.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,823
Reaction score
34,061
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Standard Deuce rushing to defend all things Obama.
Standard Mr. V attacking Obama no matter what he does :) He could personally come and save you from a burning building and you'd probably still find a way to spin it against him ;)

Just kiddin buddy I luv yah :mrgreen:
 

Your Star

Rage More!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,246
Reaction score
19,931
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
It's not eh place of the US President to say something like that. The point is he's not being Presidential at all. It's okay for a Jr. House member to shoot of remarks like this, even a rookie Senator. Leader of the Freeworld? No.
Why not? Presidents have said far more bold things.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,823
Reaction score
34,061
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why not? Presidents have said far more bold things.
"President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians."

Yeah I'd say that borders on insanity,
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
14,223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Obama is not saying that he is going to fire the BP CEO, he is saying if he had the power to that he would. Personally I would do it too. BP is a hypocritical company that pushes that they are green, however reality shows that they care little for the environment. BP handled the spill horribly, and now America must pay for their incompetence. I don't blame Obama for his anger, and I support him on this.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It's not eh place of the US President to say something like that. The point is he's not being Presidential at all. It's okay for a Jr. House member to shoot of remarks like this, even a rookie Senator. Leader of the Freeworld? No.
And I'm sure that you would never dream of criticizing Obama for being too soft if he HADN'T made those remarks, right? Of course not. The purpose of this thread is obviously a principled objection to a president commenting on a business' affairs, rather than retarded partisan hackery. Carry on. :roll:
 

MCS117

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
121
Reaction score
27
Location
United States of America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
"President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians."

Yeah I'd say that borders on insanity,
Source or it didn't happen...
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
And I'm sure that you would never dream of criticizing Obama for being too soft if he HADN'T made those remarks, right? Of course not. The purpose of this thread is obviously a principled objection to a president commenting on a business' affairs, rather than retarded partisan hackery. Carry on. :roll:
I don't think the Gov't should be involved as it is with the "Oil Spill". So far all that's done is muck things up even worse.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't think the Gov't should be involved as it is with the "Oil Spill". So far all that's done is muck things up even worse.
So you believe that we should rely solely on the morons who caused disasters in the first place to clean them up? I realize that at this late stage in the game, we might not have any choice for this oil spill. But as a general matter of policy, that's crazy. The government needs to be involved, and it needs better contingency plans for these sort of things...because for all we know, the same thing could happen again tomorrow.
 
Last edited:

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
So you believe that we should rely solely on the morons who caused disasters in the first place to clean them up?
First off, never said that. Secondly, "morons who caused disasters in the first place". Do you know the CAUSE of the rig going down? Was it the fault of the BP Officials or an error on platform? Did I miss where the "Cause" was found??

Note I said "I don't think Gov't should be involved as it is" That does not say "I think Gov't should stay out of this entirely".

Strawman meet Kandahar... oh you two are dating, I see.

I realize that at this late stage in the game, we might not have any choice for this oil spill. But as a general matter of policy, that's crazy. The government needs to be involved, and it needs better contingency plans for these sort of things...because for all we know, the same thing could happen again tomorrow.
It could happen tomorrow, and the more we look to Gov't to solve the problems, the more they'll screw it up.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
First off, never said that. Secondly, "morons who caused disasters in the first place". Do you know the CAUSE of the rig going down? Was it the fault of the BP Officials or an error on platform? Did I miss where the "Cause" was found??
If it was caused by an error on the platform, then it is still BP and/or Halliburton's fault. Workers are agents of the company that employs them.

MrVicchio said:
Note I said "I don't think Gov't should be involved as it is" That does not say "I think Gov't should stay out of this entirely".

Strawman meet Kandahar... oh you two are dating, I see.
How did I misrepresent what you said? You complained about Obama being the "CEO of the world," implying that his involvement is a bad thing. But OK, let's unassume for a moment: You don't want the government out entirely...you just want them LESS involved. So then I have the same question, just replace "rely solely" with "rely primarily."

MrVicchio said:
It could happen tomorrow, and the more we look to Gov't to solve the problems, the more they'll screw it up.
So then your solution *is* to rely primarily on the companies that create disasters to clean them up in the future? They are not motivated by preventing as much harm as possible; they are motivated by saving as much money as possible. Those two goals do not always overlap.
 
Last edited:

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
It's not eh place of the US President to say something like that. The point is he's not being Presidential at all. It's okay for a Jr. House member to shoot of remarks like this, even a rookie Senator. Leader of the Freeworld? No.

Lemme get this straight, just so we're all clear on what you're saying:

During an interview, the President is not allowed to speak hypothetically or make an analogy to illustrate his opinion of a person's job performance?

So basically, a President can not use the word "if" in the conditional sense.

Shall we ban metaphors and rhetorical questions as well??
 
Joined
May 31, 2010
Messages
107
Reaction score
19
Location
Paris, France
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
He's not stating that he is in fact going to fire him. He's stating that if he was working for him, he would fire him.
You can't blame him for that.
So True, So true, Obama is the PRESIDENT of the U.S.A. NOT THE CEO of the BP OIL COMPANY....
WHAT IN THE HELL IS HE SUPPOSE TO DO ???? Take a sub-marine or a dive under water and create a miracle of some sort... With all the lies and hiding the real facts of what's going on down under, WHO'S GOT SOME ANSWERS OR SOLUTIONS TO THIS RED LIGHT EMERGENCY !!!!
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Standard Mr. V attacking Obama no matter what he does :) He could personally come and save you from a burning building and you'd probably still find a way to spin it against him ;)

Just kiddin buddy I luv yah :mrgreen:
PBO did something? When?!?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
If it was caused by an error on the platform, then it is still BP and/or Halliburton's fault. Workers are agents of the company that employs them.



How did I misrepresent what you said? You complained about Obama being the "CEO of the world," implying that his involvement is a bad thing. But OK, let's unassume for a moment: You don't want the government out entirely...you just want them LESS involved. So then I have the same question, just replace "rely solely" with "rely primarily."



So then your solution *is* to rely primarily on the companies that create disasters to clean them up in the future? They are not motivated by preventing as much harm as possible; they are motivated by saving as much money as possible. Those two goals do not always overlap.
OMG!! Why do you keep throwing Halliburton into the mix? Seriously! Why?!? Do you think that Halliburton is the only srvice company to work on that rig?

Why aren't you tirading Cooper-Cameron? They built the BOP.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I will point out that this was simply "alleged" by a Palestinian official. If he said it or not is up for debate I suppose.
Rumor is as good as fact to a Liberal.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
And war on false pretenses is absolutely acceptable to a conservative :)
All I can say to that is...:rofl!!!

Is that really the best response you have?

BTW, got any proof that it was on, "false pretenses"?
 
Top Bottom