PDA

View Full Version : I blame Obama



Qtec
05-07-2010, 05:25 AM
.or maybe I don't. Flashback.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>FLASHBACK: The Sex And Oil Scandals Of The Minerals Management Service</span>

Of the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said it best on Tuesday: <span style='font-size: 20pt'>"In the Bush administration, these were the guys that were having sex orgies and pot parties and weren't showing up for work."</span>

As the government agency that regulates offshore drilling, MMS is already under scrutiny for its handling of the rig that exploded and caused the oil spill. It's not yet clear whether there were missteps by the agency, though the Washington Post reported earlier this week that MMS' environmental impact assessments of the Deepwater Horizon rig had not considered the possibility of a major spill.

But longtime TPMmuckraker readers will be familiar with the agency's past woes. Let's take a spin through the archives:

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Sex-for-Oil Scandal Rocks Interior Department (January 2007)</span>:

This investigation into possible<u> favors-for-favors</u> (monetary or otherwise) is just part of a much larger scandal that's emerging from MMS. Through bad contracting, lax auditing and nonexistent -- possibly criminal -- oversight,<span style='font-size: 20pt'> a picture is emerging of Interior officials either colluding with big oil companies to defraud the country on a massive scale, or dispatching their responsibilities in an abysmally negligent fashion.</span>


CQ:<span style='font-size: 23pt'> Officials Covered Up Oil Lease Problems, IG Says (January 2007):</span>

Uh-oh. The Interior Department's internal watchdog says top officials at the agency <span style='font-size: 17pt'>knew about problems costing taxpayers as much as $10 billion in revenue, but tried to hide the problem from the public,</span> according to Congressional Quarterly's Jeff Tollefson.

One official may even have lied to Congress about when she knew things were screwy with her agency's energy contracts, which have allowed companies like ExxonMobil and Shell to pay billions less than they should have to extract oil and gas from federal lands ...

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Interior Disciplines Staffers For Partying With Oil Workers</span> (November 2008):

Looks like having sex with employees of oil companies you're supposed to be regulating -- not to mention doing drugs in the office -- isn't such a great career move after all.



Late Update: Some may remember that sex-for-oil scandal by its other (commenter-generated) name: Lubrigate.
</div></div>

...all under Bush.

Q

pooltchr
05-07-2010, 07:43 AM
And since 2009, BP has increased spending on campaiogn contributions and lobbying efforts. They contributed more to Obama's campaign than to any other politician. And, surely it is just a coincidence that federal regulators granted BP waivers to many of the regulations in the past months.

One major recipient of donations from BP is Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who has taken more than $15,000 in PAC contributions and thousands more from BP employees, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Landrieu said at a hearing earlier this year that the risks of offshore drilling were "minimal," and since the spill has urged caution in moving to curtail the practice.

Just keeping things in perspective for ya, Q.

Steve

Gayle in MD
05-07-2010, 08:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And since 2009, BP has increased spending on campaiogn contributions and lobbying efforts. They contributed more to Obama's campaign than to any other politician. And, surely it is just a coincidence that federal regulators granted BP waivers to many of the regulations in the past months.

One major recipient of donations from BP is Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who has taken more than $15,000 in PAC contributions and thousands more from BP employees, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Landrieu said at a hearing earlier this year that the risks of offshore drilling were "minimal," and since the spill has urged caution in moving to curtail the practice.

Just keeping things in perspective for ya, Q.

Steve </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is likely that George W Bush and his allies have received more campaign contributions from oil companies than any other administration in history. All told, data compiled by the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics show that oil and gas firms donated $1,889,206 to Bush's presidential campaign, making the industry among the top ten special interest contributors to Bush in Election 2000. Individuals connected with the oil industry contributed at least an additional $85,500 to the Bush campaign. The Bush Presidential Inaugural Committee received yet another $ 1 million in contributions from oil and gas firms. The oil and gas industry contributed at least $556,700 to Bush's 1994 and 1998 campaigns for Governor of Texas. Individuals connected with the industry contributed an additional $944,733.
</div></div>

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Oil_watch/Oil_BushAdmin.html



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During his first month in office, President George W. Bush appointed Vice President Dick Cheney to head a task force charged with developing the country's energy policy. The group, which conducted its meetings in secret, relied on the recommendations of Big Oil behemoths Exxon Mobil, Conoco, Shell Oil, BP America and Chevron. It would be the first of many moves to come during the Bush administration that would position oil and gas companies well ahead of other energy interests with billions of dollars in subsidies and tax cuts—payback for an industry with strong ties to the administration and plenty of money to contribute to congressional and presidential campaigns.

During the time that Bush and Cheney, both of whom are former oil executives, have been in the White House, the oil and gas industry has spent $393.2 million on lobbying the federal government. This places the industry among the top nine in lobbying expenditures. The industry has also contributed a substantial $82.1 million to federal candidates, parties and political action committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. 80 percent of the industry's contributions have gone to Republicans.


Buying Pro-Industry Policy

This support has not gone unrewarded. In 2005, Bush, who has received more from the oil and gas industry than any other politician, signed an energy bill from the Republican-controlled Congress that gave $14.5 billion in tax breaks for oil, gas, nuclear power and coal companies. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was based on recommendations by Cheney's energy task force, also rolled back regulations the oil industry considered burdensome, including exemptions from some clean water laws. All of this transpired only one year after Congress passed a bill that included a tax cut for domestic manufacturing that was expected to save energy companies at least $3.6 billion over a decade.

"Political action committees, lobbyists and executives do not give money to politicians or parties out of an altruistic support of the principles of democracy," says Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program. "They are savvy investors expecting a return on their investments. Politicians routinely deliver on campaign contributions that are provided to them... [by] giving goodies to the industry." And the size of those contributions matters.

In comparison, environmental groups and alternative energy production and supply companies, which didn't see similar benefits come out of the Republican Congress's legislation, have made paltry contributions. Environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters and the Nature Conservancy, which often push for policy that is punitive to Big Oil, have given nearly 11 times less than the oil industry since 2001. The disparity is not a strategic difference, but the financial reality for these smaller competing interests. Exxon Mobil, for example, reported the largest annual profit on record for a U.S. corporation in 2006, bringing in $39.5 billion. Comparatively, the nonprofit Sierra Club Foundation—which funds organizations in addition to the Sierra Club—reported income in 2006 of $29 million.

With members of Congress paying special attention to Big Oil, the policy that elected representatives have developed does not reflect the interest of the public, which wants "affordable, reliable, clean sources of energy," Slocum says. A 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center found a majority of Americans across the political spectrum want an energy policy that emphasizes renewable and alternative sources of energy.

"Energy companies have a right to have a say in energy policy. Do they have a right to dictate energy policy, to be the only people at the table? Absolutely not. That was the main problem with the Cheney task force—[the industry] was the only one at the table," says Slocum.

To keep its prominent seat, the industry spends big sums of money on hiring the top lobbyists in Washington to push its agenda on a variety of issues, not just related to energy but on issues ranging from education to real estate. After a few years of declining lobbying expenditures, the industry spent $63.3 million in 2005, most of which was probably related to the energy bill. (Lobbying reports don't require lobbyists to itemize their spending related to specific bills or amendments). In 2007, with a new energy bill in the pipeline, the industry's lobbying expenditures are on track to exceed last year's total of $73 million. Big Oil has spent seven times more than environmental groups on lobbying since President Bush took office.

Marchant Wentworth, a lobbyist for the environmental advocacy group the Union of Concerned Scientists, says money buys access. "I've been working in the public interest environmental business for 30 years and 90 percent of the time I'm talking to staff," Wentworth said. "The oil and gas industry talks to the members themselves. That is a huge difference. Access is an important thing."

The Biggest Spenders and Takers


"With a new energy bill in the pipeline, the industry's lobbying expenditures are on track to exceed last year's total of $73 million." The energy companies that spend the most on lobbying the federal government also tend to be those that give the most to politicians for their campaigns. Since 2001, Exxon Mobil, Marathon Oil, Shell Oil, Chevron and BP America—many of which provided guidance to Cheney's task force—have spent the most among energy companies on lobbying. Exxon Mobil and Chevron, in addition to El Paso Corp and Koch Industries, have been among the most generous campaign contributors within the industry during Bush's time in office. The American Petroleum Institute, which represents the oil industry in Washington, declined to comment for this story, and a spokesman from the national trade group the Independent Petroleum Association of America was unavailable for comment.

Lawmakers, who live in areas that depend on oil production for their economy, are likely to be among the largest recipients of contributions from the oil and gas industry—and to vote in favor of legislation that helps it. The top three members of Congress to receive money from Big Oil during the Bush administration are all Republicans and are, not surprisingly, all from oil-rich Texas. The big names include Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both of whom have supported subsidies for gas and oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Also is Rep. Joe Barton, who sponsored the 2005 energy bill and was chair of the House Energy & Commerce Committee at the time. Fellow Texan Tom DeLay, who was the House Majority Leader in 2005 and was instrumental in pushing the energy bill through, also ranks among the top to receive money from the industry during Bush's two terms. Of the 50 members of Congress who have received the most contributions from oil and gas companies since 2001, only six are Democrats.

Campaign contributions don't always get the oil industry desired results. Many of the oil industry chieftains, who were pushing to open ANWR for exploration, were disappointed when the 2005 energy bill came out of conference committee without that provision. Nor, do campaign contributions always get the industry's favorite candidates elected. Four of five of Big Oil's most favored candidates—all Republicans—lost their re-election races in 2006, despite hefty campaign contributions from oil and gas employees and PACs that cycle. The losers included Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Conrad Burns of Montana, George Allen of Virginia and James Talent of Missouri.

Battles on the Horizon

With Democrats now in control of Congress, the oil and gas industry is finding that it's getting less for its money on Capitol Hill. Other industries with competing interests and far less cash to spread around, such as environmental groups and alternative energy producers, are now finding more support for their legislative goals. For example, the Clean Energy Act of 2007 seeks to repeal the 2004 and 2005 tax breaks to Big Oil and re-direct the money to renewable energy efforts.

Because of the change in power, the oil industry faces the possibility of stricter oversight and fewer goodies from Congress. The industry "definitely has to be worried that there will be anti-oil legislation of all types, and also possibly regulations, depending on who takes over the White House," says David Victor, a law professor at Stanford University and a senior fellow on the Council for Foreign Relations. Victor was part of the council's task force on energy security.

"I think [the new leadership] generally puts the issue on the agenda for legislative action. It puts it higher on the agenda. But it's not clear Congress will actually be able to do very much in terms of getting the votes for legislation, because energy policy in reality is very controversial and often very expensive," Victor said. "That's something that both parties have a difficult time dealing with."

So far Congress has been slow to push through comprehensive energy legislation, in part because issues related to renewable energy standards and fuel efficiency standards differ by region, rather than political party, which means not all democrats are on board, says Frank O'Donnell, president of the environmental advocacy group Clean Air Watch. "Some of the southern-based coal burning power companies have killed or delayed efforts to set a renewable energy requirement for electric companies. Michigan Reps. and others influenced by the car industry have also managed to put off any kind of tougher requirements for fuel economy." O'Donnell says. "John Dingell is a democrat but doesn't see eye to eye with [Speaker of the House] Nancy Pelosi in some of these issues and so far you've seen somewhat of a stalemate."

Dingell has consistently defended the auto industry, which is fighting against stricter fuel economy standards. These standards have not been changed since the 1980s. The auto industry is a major player in Dingell's home state of Michigan, which relies heavily on the industry for jobs and is the corporate home of General Motors, Ford and the domestic division of DaimlerChrysler. Among all members of Congress, Dingell has received the second most in contributions from the auto industry at $869,200, just behind Republican Spencer Abraham, a former Michigan senator. The industry has been one of Dingell's largest contributors during his career—second only to electric utilities.

During former President Bill Clinton's administration, Congressional Democrats who supported more rigid standards missed a chance to pass such legislation, but they had to grapple with a Republican-controlled Congress largely unsympathetic to the idea. Congress just adjourned for the Thanksgiving break without voting on an energy bill that would, among other things, boost the fuel efficiency of the nation's vehicles. Speaker Pelosi had hoped but failed to bring the measure to a vote, largely because negotiations stalled over the fuel economy standards.


"With Democrats now in control of Congress, the oil and gas industry is finding that it's getting less for its money on Capitol Hill." The Changing Climate for Energy Policy

As Congress wrestles with the comprehensive energy legislation, the oil and gas industry is not only fighting off repeals of its tax breaks, but is pushing again for increased domestic production of energy, specifically permission to drill in certain coastal areas that have been off limits. The companies are also trying to prevent democrats from prosecuting them for jacking up prices excessively and they publicly oppose the bill's mandated use of alternative fuels. The industry joined the fight for coal-to-liquid fuel, in which oil companies have investments, but the controversial provision to encourage creating diesel fuel from domestic coal has already been eliminated from both the house and senate's versions of the bill. The legislation is also meant to correct an error by the interior department during former President Bill Clinton's time in office that allowed many companies to drill in deep waters without paying royalties. [for more on the royalty issue, see NOW reports "The Royalty Treatment" and "Crude Awakening"]

The best Big Oil can do right now is slow down the legislation, Wentworth of the Union of Concerned Scientists says. "The [legislation] is being held up because the oil and gas industry is concerned about closing loopholes for offshore drilling," he says. "They're fighting this tooth and nail. This is slowing down the clean energy solutions that the public wants."

Environmentalists, who had very little influence in Congress when Republicans were in control, are now seeing the lawmakers seriously consider their positions. This includes environmentalists' support of fuel efficiency standards, a mandate for electric utility companies to produce 15 percent of electricity from renewable sources and their opposition to coal-to-liquid fuel development. Nowhere is this change in tides more evident than in the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, which is heavily involved in energy legislation. California Sen. Barbara Boxer, considered one of the environment's biggest champions, has chaired the committee since her party assumed control of the Senate in the 2006 election. Boxer replaced Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, a Republican who has received $572,000 from the oil and gas industry since President Bush took office—more than all but three other members of Congress. Since 2001, Boxer has received less than $13,000 from the industry and nearly 69 times more from environmental policy groups than Inhofe.

"The oil and gas industry, like almost every other industry, will shift some donations from Republicans to Democrats," says Eric Smith, a political scientist who researches environmental policy at the University of California-Santa Barbara. "It's clear that the industry strongly prefers to have Republicans in power, but industries generally focus on short-term advantages. In the short term—now and presumably after the 2008 elections—Democrats hold congressional majorities. So to win the short-term battles, the industry must try to persuade Democrats in Congress to go easy on them."

Big Oil, which has always contributed heavily to Republicans, isn't likely to defensively switch its contributions to favor Democrats. But so far this year, 27 percent of the industry's contributions have gone to Democrats, up from 18 percent in the 2006 election cycle, when Republicans were still in power.

The Democratic Congress has made clean energy legislation a priority because of rising gas prices and concerns about the nation's dependence on foreign oil sources, in addition to a scientific consensus that human activity is the root cause of today's global warming. Many Republicans, too, are on board and looking for solutions. "The single most important thing that's happened in the last five years is the price of oil has shot up," Stanford's David Victor says. "That run-up has changed the politics and incentives for people to take an interest in conservation, and that's completely bipartisan. There are people in the left wing and the right wing that say we need to do something about this problem."

*Total includes all contributions greater than $200. The Federal Election Commission does not require recipients to itemize smaller donations.

</div></div>

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/oil-politics.html

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain - Each Has Accepted Over $100 Thousand Dollars
Each campaign for the White House is different. Every four years the candidates are different, the twists and turns unique, the upsets and scandals one of a kind. Throughout the years only one thing seems to remain constant. Money. Money is what it takes to get into the White House. Money buys advertising, campaign workers, and all the other necessaries to win votes. Neatly, cleanly and legally.

If our country operates on the principal that nobody gets something for nothing, it's worth a look to see which of the three remaining candidates, Democrat Barack Obama, Republican John McCain, and Democrat Hillary Clinton all stand in relation to campaign contributions from the oil industry; Exon, Shell, Occidental, Global Partners Ltd., ConocoPhillips, etc. The very corporations and companies that may be or may not be manipulating the prices of oil to line the pockets of their shareholders. The companies and corporations traditionally associated, at least by Democrats, with big money, old money, Texas money, smart money and Republicans.

Unlikely as it sounds, it's Democrat Hillary Clinton who has taken the most from big oil money of the big three candidates. It's also a fact according to Follow The Oil Money, a website that compiles statistics on who is taking what from who at oilmoney.priceofoil.org/federalRaceGraph.php. And in Hillary Clinton's case she has taken a whopping $267 thousand dollars from big oil interests to fuel her campaign. In second place is Republican John McCain with $229 thousand dollars in big oil contributions. Coming in last in big oil money contributions is Democrat Barack Obama. But before crowning Senator Obama a man of the people, Obama was no slouch either, having accepted over $128 thousand dollars from big oil interests. The actual number of contributing oil corporations in Barack Obama's case were fewer and the contributions themselves were generally smaller. The politician who benefitted the most from big oil campaign contributions in the 2008 Presidential campaign was former Presidential candidate Republican Rudy Giuliani with $634 thousand dollars.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or John McCain - Each Has Accepted Over $100 Thousand Dollars
By constrast, in the 2004 Presidential election George Bush ran for re-election with the help of $2.5 million dollars from the oil industry, an indication that the "Big Oil President" label he's been given by political opponents has a basis in fact. His Democratic competitor in that election, John Kerry, took $187 thousand dollars in oil money by comaprison to fuel his campaign for the White House in 2004.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Bush took $1.95 million dollars from big oil during his first campaign for President in 2000 compared to only $142 thousand dollars taken in by Democrat challenger Al Gore. </span>
SOURCE:
Follow the Oil Money, @ oilmoney.priceofoil.org/federalRaceGraph.php
</div></div>
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/636357/who_took_the_most_campaign_money_from.html?cat=62

pooltchr
05-07-2010, 08:35 AM
OK, "But Bush"! We get it.

But the fact still remains that Obama got more from BP than they had ever given to any other candidate. And on his watch, BP was granted waivers to the regulations that were in place.

Maybe if Obama hadn't waived this for BP, the rig may not have exploded, and we wouldn't have the problem we have right now. There is no way to know for sure. But you can't continue to deflect everything to Bush. Obama is in charge, as as such, has full responsibility.

Sooner or later, if you expect to have any credibility at all, you will have to admit that Obama is screwing up.

Steve

Gayle in MD
05-07-2010, 09:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, "But Bush"! We get it.

But the fact still remains that Obama got more from BP than they had ever given to any other candidate. And on his watch, BP was granted waivers to the regulations that were in place.

<span style="color: #000066">Ha ha ha, that's pretty funny....thanks for the laugh. </span>

There is no way to know for sure. But you can't continue to deflect everything to Bush.

<span style="color: #000066">Bush removed more regulations on everything, than any president, ever, including water and air quality, even allowing mining in National Parks! </span>


Obama is in charge, as as such, has full responsibility.

<span style="color: #000066">I'd say BP has full responsibility, and as our President stated, BP is going to pay for it, too. </span>

Sooner or later, if you expect to have any credibility at all, you will have to admit that Obama is screwing up.

<span style="color: #000066">Sooner or later you're going to have to admit that Obama had nothing to do with an oil well blowing up, and also that no one ever got as much from oil, nor did as much for oil, as the Bush Administration! </span>

Steve </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">As usual, you provide no proof of anything you assert.

John McCain took the most money from oil corporations of any candidate.

BP only contributed $69,000.00 in total during the 08 presidential campaign.

George Bush destroyed all of the limits on drilling before we ever got into the 08 campaign.

I have already posted that information, with links.

As far as I know, nothing has gone through yet on waiving anything, yet, however, to suggest that the oil well wouldn't have blown up if not for President Obama, is absurd.

I have not found any information that proves that BP gave more of their contributions to Obama, but given that overall, McCain, took $2,402,937.00, from oil, and Obama took $898,251.00, from oil, I'd say your point is rather moot.

Just scroll over the faces, and the numbers show up.</span>
http://oilmoney.priceofoil.org/federalRaceGraph.php?type=presidential

Oh, and I guess you didn't bother reading Q.'s excellent post:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">FLASHBACK: The Sex And Oil Scandals Of The Minerals Management Service

Of the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) said it best on Tuesday: "In the Bush administration, these were the guys that were having sex orgies and pot parties and weren't showing up for work."

As the government agency that regulates offshore drilling, MMS is already under scrutiny for its handling of the rig that exploded and caused the oil spill. It's not yet clear whether there were missteps by the agency, though the Washington Post reported earlier this week that MMS' environmental impact assessments of the Deepwater Horizon rig had not considered the possibility of a major spill.

But longtime TPMmuckraker readers will be familiar with the agency's past woes. Let's take a spin through the archives:

Sex-for-Oil Scandal Rocks Interior Department (January 2007):

This investigation into possible favors-for-favors (monetary or otherwise) is just part of a much larger scandal that's emerging from MMS. Through bad contracting, lax auditing and nonexistent -- possibly criminal -- oversight, a picture is emerging of Interior officials either colluding with big oil companies to defraud the country on a massive scale, or dispatching their responsibilities in an abysmally negligent fashion.


CQ: Officials Covered Up Oil Lease Problems, IG Says (January 2007):

Uh-oh. The Interior Department's internal watchdog says top officials at the agency knew about problems costing taxpayers as much as $10 billion in revenue, but tried to hide the problem from the public, according to Congressional Quarterly's Jeff Tollefson.

One official may even have lied to Congress about when she knew things were screwy with her agency's energy contracts, which have allowed companies like ExxonMobil and Shell to pay billions less than they should have to extract oil and gas from federal lands ...

Interior Disciplines Staffers For Partying With Oil Workers (November 2008):

Looks like having sex with employees of oil companies you're supposed to be regulating -- not to mention doing drugs in the office -- isn't such a great career move after all.



Late Update: Some may remember that sex-for-oil scandal by its other (commenter-generated) name: Lubrigate.


...all under Bush.

Q </div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gifG.

pooltchr
05-07-2010, 10:23 AM
Gosh, Gayle. I wouldn't have to set you straight so much, if you would just do a little research before you post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>
The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.

The decision by the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 </span>

Steve

Gayle in MD
05-07-2010, 11:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gosh, Gayle. I wouldn't have to set you straight so much, if you would just do a little research before you post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050404118.html
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>
The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.

The decision by the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 </span>

Steve </div></div>

I read that article, and thought to myself, Obama should have done what Bush did when he got into office, and fired everyone from the previous administration.

The difference is that the president has already launched a thorough investigation, and listed the efforts which are already under review. It's all available on the White House Web Site.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">U.S. exempted BP's Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 5, 2010

The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.

The decision by the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 -- and BP's lobbying efforts just 11 days before the explosion to expand those exemptions -- show that neither federal regulators nor the company anticipated an accident of the scale of the one unfolding in the gulf.

Rethinking the rules


Now, environmentalists and some key senators are calling for a reassessment of safety requirements for offshore drilling.

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who has supported offshore oil drilling in the past, said, "I suspect you're going to see an entirely different regime once people have a chance to sit back and take a look at how do we anticipate and clean up these potential environmental consequences" from drilling.

BP spokesman Toby Odone said the company's appeal for NEPA waivers in the past "was based on the spill and incident-response history in the Gulf of Mexico." Once the various investigations of the new spill have been completed, he added, "the causes of this incident can be applied to determine any changes in the regulatory regime that are required to protect the environment."

"I'm of the opinion that boosterism breeds complacency and complacency breeds disaster," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) on Tuesday. "That, in my opinion, is what happened."

Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said it is important to learn the cause of the accident before pursuing a major policy change. "While the conversation has shifted, the energy reality has not," Gerard said. "The American economy still relies on oil and gas."

While the MMS assessed the environmental impact of drilling in the central and western Gulf of Mexico on three occasions in 2007 -- including a specific evaluation of BP's Lease 206 at Deepwater Horizon -- in each case it played down the prospect of a major blowout.

In one assessment, the agency estimated that "a large oil spill" from a platform would not exceed a total of 1,500 barrels and that a "deepwater spill," occurring "offshore of the inner Continental shelf," would not reach the coast. In another assessment, it defined the most likely large spill as totaling 4,600 barrels and forecast that it would largely dissipate within 10 days and would be unlikely to make landfall.

"They never did an analysis that took into account what turns out to be the very real possibility of a serious spill," said Holly Doremus, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley who has reviewed the documents.

The MMS mandates that companies drilling in some areas identify under NEPA what could reduce a project's environmental impact. But Interior Department spokesman Matt Lee-Ashley said the service grants between 250 and 400 waivers a year for Gulf of Mexico projects. He added that Interior has now established the "first ever" board to examine safety procedures for offshore drilling. It will report back within 30 days on BP's oil spill and will conduct "a broader review of safety issues," Lee-Ashley said.

BP's exploration plan for Lease 206, which calls the prospect of an oil spill "unlikely," stated that "no mitigation measures other than those required by regulation and BP policy will be employed to avoid, diminish or eliminate potential impacts on environmental resources."

While the plan included a 13-page environmental impact analysis, it minimized the prospect of any serious damage associated with a spill, saying there would be only "sub-lethal" effects on fish and marine mammals, and "birds could become oiled. However it is unlikely that an accidental oil spill would occur from the proposed activities."

Kierán Suckling, executive director of the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity, said the federal waiver "put BP entirely in control" of the way it conducted its drilling.

Agency a 'rubber stamp'


"The agency's oversight role has devolved to little more than rubber-stamping British Petroleum's self-serving drilling plans," Suckling said.

BP has lobbied the White House Council on Environmental Quality -- which provides NEPA guidance for all federal agencies-- to provide categorical exemptions more often. In an April 9 letter, BP America's senior federal affairs director, Margaret D. Laney, wrote to the council that such exemptions should be used in situations where environmental damage is likely to be "minimal or non-existent." An expansion in these waivers would help "avoid unnecessary paperwork and time delays," she added.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill were talking Tuesday about curtailing offshore oil exploration rather than making it easier. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>In addition to traditional foes of offshore drilling such as Democratic Sens. Robert Menendez (N.J.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.), Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and centrists such as Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) said they are taking a second look at such methods. </span>
"It's time to push the pause button," Baucus told reporters.

</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">As I have stated, many times, Corporations cannot be trusted to regulate themselves. BP obviously lied. IIRC, Bush removed a tremendous amount of regulations particularly on the oil industry. Atleast two of the President's nominations being Blocked by the Republicans right now, are people the president nominated for environmental Protection.

Maybe none of this would have happened, if Republicans weren't crippling the government with their policy of NO, and being complete obstructionists. </span>


<span style="color: #000066">You will note, most of those against off shore drilling, are Democratic Representatives. Republicans have a history of deregulation, particularly for oil.

Those of us who are against off shore drilling completely, are called tree hugers. "Drill Baby Drill" was the Republican mantra, IIRC, coined by your favorite candidate, Sara Palin.

I stated here, when President Obama said that he was thinking of more off-shore drilling, that I was completely against drilling anywhere off shore....in our endangered oceans.

Additionally, </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In recent weeks President Obama has come under fire recently for being "too cautious" and "too slow" in making appointments to vacant federal posts. Many of these posts however, have not filled as the result of Republicans holds and obstruction.

Below, a slideshow of nine appointees who are in limbo -- and the (often unrelated) political motivations behind their sorry situations.

Miriam Sapiro was nominated to serve as deputy U.S. trade representative in April. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) continues to block her confirmation because he is unhappy with the Canadian Parliament.

• • • • • • • • • Martha Johnson was nominated to head the General Services Administration. Sen. Christopher Bond (R-Mo.) is blocking her confirmation because "the agency has been balking at constructing a $175 million federal building for Kansas City."

<span style='font-size: 17pt'> Paul Anastas was nominated to serve as assistant administrator for the Environment Protection Agency. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) is maintaining a hold on Anastas until the EPA agrees to delay issuing regulations on formaldehyde, which has been classified as a probable human carcinogen.</span>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>• • • • • • • • • Robert Perciasepe was nominated to serve as the EPA's deputy administrator. Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) is holding up his confirmation because he "believes the EPA is underestimating the cost to households of climate change legislation." </span>

• • • • • • • • • Arturo Valenzuela was nominated to serve as assistant secretary of state for the Western Hemisphere. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) is blocking his confirmation because Valenzuela called the ousting of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya a "classic military coup."

• • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • Judge Andre Davis was nominated for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. Anonymous holds prevent a full Senate confirmation vote.


• • • • • • • • • Francisco Sanchez was nominated to be Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade. Republican staff serving under Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on the Senate Finance Committee have repeatedly delayed Sanchez's confirmation hearing.



[quote]Resolved QuestionShow me another »
The Republicans have held up 77 of Obama's appointees, Are they just Blocking Progress /Recovery for Political?
By this time in the Bush administration there were only 5 appointees left unassigned, Is this just another way the republicans are trying block our recovery and progress just to make Obama look bad for the next election. Is this going beyond dereliction of duty and placing politics before the nation the swore to defend. Does this prove the Republicans would rather see millions remain out of work and our economy fail then to allow Obama any credit for doing his job?
1 month ago

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Yes, their strategy is to block everything they can then claim that Obama didn't accomplish anything.

And they think that we are all so stupid we will fall for it.

Maybe they're right, people still listen to Palin.
</div></div>
• • • • • • • • •



http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100328075151AAIGGSf



The Republicans have held up 77 of Obama's appointees, Are they just Blocking Progress /Recovery for Political?
By this time in the Bush administration there were only 5 appointees left unassigned, Is this just another way the republicans are trying block our recovery and progress just to make Obama look bad for the next election. Is this going beyond dereliction of duty and placing politics before the nation the swore to defend. Does this prove the Republicans would rather see millions remain out of work and our economy fail then to allow Obama any credit for doing his job?
1 month ago



Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Yes, their strategy is to block everything they can then claim that Obama didn't accomplish anything.

And they think that we are all so stupid we will fall for it.

Maybe they're right, people still listen to Palin.


His next chance is the recess next month, he should just put them all in their jobs before congress comes back in session.

The Republicans had no problem with Bush making Recess Appointments, but I'm sure they would be crying and whining if Obama did it.

Ronald Reagan made 243 recess appointments during his two terms in office, George H. W. Bush made 77 during his single term, Bill Clinton made a total of 140 recess appointments over his two terms.
In his first six years in office, Bush made 167 recess appointments.

"The Republicans had no problem with Bush making Recess Appointments, but I'm sure they would be crying and whining if Obama did it."

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100328075151AAIGGSf

sack316
05-07-2010, 12:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The difference is that the president <u>has already launched a thorough investigation</u>, and listed the efforts which are already under review. It's all available on the White House Web Site.

</div></div>

Seems to be a lot of those going around.

Sack

Gayle in MD
05-08-2010, 07:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The difference is that the president <u>has already launched a thorough investigation</u>, and listed the efforts which are already under review. It's all available on the White House Web Site.

</div></div>

Seems to be a lot of those going around.

Well, I'm just saying that most resonable people, who paid attention to the Bush Administration, would know that there was massive removal of environment regulations not only for the oil industry, but for every single safeguard over energy, the air and our drinking water, including allowing more arsenic in it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bush Suspends Environmental Regulations for Oil Companies
by SusanG
Share this on Twitter - Bush Suspends Environmental Regulations for Oil Companies Tue Apr 25, 2006 at 10:10:20 AM PDT
Bumped by georgia10
From AP:


WASHINGTON - President Bush on Tuesday ordered a temporary suspension of environmental rules for gasoline, making it easier for refiners to meet demand and possibly dampen prices at the pump. He also halted for the summer the purchase of crude oil for the government's emergency reserve.
Any bets on how long a "temporary suspension" will last?

And is anyone else detecting a pattern here?

In the wake of Katrina, Bush suspends prevailing wage laws.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush basically suspends the Fourth Amendment and, at Gitmo, the right to a fair trial.

There is no tragedy, crisis or concern in this country that will go unmet by this administration ... with a boon to cronies or a bolstering of executive power.


</div></div>

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">A temporary suspension, lol, I think we all know how long it takes to remove "Temporary suspensions" after the corporations have paid off our representatives to get their way.

There was a scientific gathering last week, which I do not currently have all of the information, other then I know that their findings were that the reason why we have so much cancer, and so many autistic children, is because of all of the chemicals in our environment.

While corporate fascist pigs continue to get their way in Washington D.C., and now the right wing of the S.C. has given them full tilt to do so, we will all obviously suffer from dirtier food, dirtiers water, unregualted chemical infusion into the enviromment, and while I don't suggest that either party is completely innocent, Democratics have traditionally been the party which hs tried, and been blocked by Republicans in the interest of corporate cronies, when it comes to moving toward cleaing up the environment.

Bush's actions did not bring down the price of oil, and of course, that is always the supposed reason given for removing regulations. It never pans out any more so than trickle down economics ever does, which is never.

Meanwhile, the world is trashed in the name of profits.

That five hundred thousand dollar safe gaurd which could have prevented this spill, was removed by none other than George Bush. Who can deny the vast giveaways for big oil, by the Bush administration.

To that I will add, if this president continues the M.O. of the Republican Manisfesto of only higher profits and bigger bonuses count, and to hell with the environment and the we the people, then you'll all have to put up with me in the future, railing against Obama in the same way I did against Bush et al.

You won't find many people greener than I am. Recycle is my middle name. I am currently working to transform much of my yard into moss, with stepping stones, which needs only beer or buttermilk, to propagate, thereby eliminating the use of chemical fertilizers. I use a compost bin for my table scraps. I go way out of my way to buy American made products, it take some additional time, and not always the cheapest prices, but you'd be amazed how often American made products are actually cheaper when you start to anaylize it and look around for them, trying to avoid sending your money to China, Saudi Arabia, India, and elsewhere overseas.

All we can do is vote with our dollars, and our votes, and the Republican history of denying climate change, denying the science of Darwin, denying the toxic effects of all of the corporate poisons, removing solar panels from the White House, making fun of Jimmy Carter, who was so far ahead of his time in forcasting this growing problem with oil, and the effect it would have on our National Security. The facts are all there, and they are just a few of the reasons why I will never vote for a Republican, NEVER!


It's just too bad that everyone doesn't understand how we, and our world, are all being poisoned daily by the results of corporate lobbying, and all of the damage which resulted from a boatload of oil co-hearts in the White House for eight years, not to mention twelve years of Republicans running the show on the hill....during which the environment was pushed back into a dark corner, and it was full steam ahead in removing regulatory safe gaurds.....and while we watch this disaster unfold in the Gulf, just remember, "Drill baby drill" was the Republican Mantra.

Tree Huggers, is the Republican name for people like me who have read about all of the disastrous consequences of not enough government regulations to preserve our once clean, beautiful earth, and it's once full bounty of safe food, including everything which lives in our oceans...and grows in our soil. Chemicals are not only killing us, they are killing everything else, as well.

We need a new industrial revolution, based on cleaning up our environment, and using our good ol' American "Can Do" to get off oil, treanform our use of technology for the benefit of creating jobs to clean up the earth, clean up the massive failures in health care, provide cleaner air, water and energy, and addressing climate change, which is among our most urgent threats.

I'll vote anyday for lower profits for the pigs at the top, and a cleaner environment, and fair free market, for all of the rest of us. The RW Supreme Court though, has just about made my concerns nothing more than an unrealistic dream.

G.

</span>

LWW
05-08-2010, 09:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I'm just saying that most resonable people, who paid attention to the Bush Administration, would know that there was massive removal of environment regulations not only for the oil industry, but for every single safeguard over energy, the air and our drinking water, including allowing more arsenic in it.

G. </div></div>

Reasonable people know that the above claim is leftist boilerplate nonsense.

What happened was that William Jefferson Clinton, by executive fiat, lowered the level of allowable arsenic by 80% in the very last days of his administration. He could have done it much sooner had he truly believed it was a public health risk.

The new standards dropped allowable arsenic from 50 parts per billion to 10 PPB. There was little scientific reasoning to lower the level, and many knowledgeable in the field believed that even the old standard was draconian.

Bush rescinded the executive order, which was really nothing but a political land mine laid because it served no sane public health reason to have such a strict standard, and as soon as he did the Goremons began the wail of B-B-B-BUT B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!

After a few months Bush did as he almost always did ... he caved in to the bleatings from the left hoping they would be appeased and the Bush EPA put the stricter standards into place.

The result was no lowering of public health risk ... but it did throw over 35% of the public water supply wells out of compliance creating water shortages which are still an issue today.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) studied the pros and cons of lowering the arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for years in the late 1980s and 1990s. No action was taken until January 2001, when the Clinton administration in its final weeks promulgated a new standard of 0.01 mg/L (10 ppb) to take effect January 2006.[17] The incoming Bush administration suspended the midnight regulation, but after some months of study, the new EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman approved the new 10 ppb arsenic standard and its original effective date of January 2006.[18]

Many public water supply systems across the United States obtained their water supply from groundwater that had met the old 50 ppb arsenic standard but exceeded the new 10 ppb MCL. These utilities searched for either an alternative supply or an inexpensive treatment method to remove the arsenic from their water. In Arizona, an estimated 35% of water-supply wells were put out of compliance by the new regulation; in California, the percentage was 38%.[19]
The proper arsenic MCL continues to be debated. Some have argued that the 10 ppb federal standard is still too high, while others have argued that 10 ppb is needlessly strict.</div></div>

&gt;&gt;&gt;TRUTH VS TRUTHINESS&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_contamination_of_groundwater)

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-08-2010, 10:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, I'm just saying that most resonable people, who paid attention to the Bush Administration, would know that there was massive removal of environment regulations not only for the oil industry, but for every single safeguard over energy, the air and our drinking water, including allowing more arsenic in it.

G. </div></div>

Reasonable people know that the above claim is leftist boilerplate nonsense.

What happened was that William Jefferson Clinton, by executive fiat, lowered the level of allowable arsenic by 80% in the very last days of his administration. He could have done it much sooner had he truly believed it was a public health risk.

The new standards dropped allowable arsenic from 50 parts per billion to 10 PPB. There was little scientific reasoning to lower the level, and many knowledgeable in the field believed that even the old standard was draconian.

Bush rescinded the executive order, which was really nothing but a political land mine laid because it served no sane public health reason to have such a strict standard, and as soon as he did the Goremons began the wail of B-B-B-BUT B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!

After a few months Bush did as he almost always did ... he caved in to the bleatings from the left hoping they would be appeased and the Bush EPA put the stricter standards into place.

The result was no lowering of public health risk ... but it did throw over 35% of the public water supply wells out of compliance creating water shortages which are still an issue today.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) studied the pros and cons of lowering the arsenic Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for years in the late 1980s and 1990s. No action was taken until January 2001, when the Clinton administration in its final weeks promulgated a new standard of 0.01 mg/L (10 ppb) to take effect January 2006.[17] The incoming Bush administration suspended the midnight regulation, but after some months of study, the new EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman approved the new 10 ppb arsenic standard and its original effective date of January 2006.[18]

Many public water supply systems across the United States obtained their water supply from groundwater that had met the old 50 ppb arsenic standard but exceeded the new 10 ppb MCL. These utilities searched for either an alternative supply or an inexpensive treatment method to remove the arsenic from their water. In Arizona, an estimated 35% of water-supply wells were put out of compliance by the new regulation; in California, the percentage was 38%.[19]
The proper arsenic MCL continues to be debated. Some have argued that the 10 ppb federal standard is still too high, while others have argued that 10 ppb is needlessly strict.</div></div>

&gt;&gt;&gt;TRUTH VS TRUTHINESS&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_contamination_of_groundwater)

LWW </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">January 2001
20 On the day of George W. Bush’s inauguration, Chief of Staff Andrew Card issues a sixty-day moratorium halting all new health, safety, and environmental regulations issued in the final days of the Clinton administration.
23 On the twenty-eighth anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, Bush reinstates the “global gag rule” barring U.S. funding for abortion counseling abroad.
February 2001
5 Bush suspends Clinton’s “roadless rule” protecting nearly sixty million acres of forests from logging and road-building.
17 Bush signs four anti-union executive orders, including measures to prohibit “project labor agreements” at federal construction sites and to remove job protections for union employees whose companies lose federal contracts.
26 Senate Republicans introduce a bill to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration.
March 2001
7 At the urging of President Bush, Congress repeals ergonomic regulations designed to protect workers from repetitive-stress injuries.
9 Bush issues an executive order to prevent mechanics at Northwest Airlines from going on strike.
14 Bush abandons his campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>20 Bush administration moves to overturn a Clinton regulation reducing the allowable level of arsenic in drinking water. </span>28 Bush backs out of Kyoto treaty on global warming.
April 2001
4 United States Department of Agriculture proposes lifting a requirement that all beef used in federal school lunch programs must be tested for salmonella; the proposal is dropped two days later.
9 Department of Interior proposes a limit on lawsuits seeking protection of endangered species.
May 2001
11 Bush administration abandons international effort to crack down on offshore tax havens.
16 Vice President Dick Cheney’s task force releases its “National Energy Policy” report, calling for weaker environmental regulations and massive subsidies for the oil and gas, coal, and nuclear power industries.
26 Congress passes $1.35 trillion tax cut.
29 Bush meets with California governor Gray Davis but refuses to impose federal price controls to curtail California’s energy crisis.
June 2001
19 Cheney refuses to release records of energy task force meetings to the General Accounting Office.
21 Bush threatens to veto McCain-Kennedy patients’ bill of rights legislation.
28 Attorney General John Ashcroft announces a policy that would require gun records be destroyed one day after a background check rather than ninety days later.
July 2001
9 Bush administration opposes UN treaty to curb international trafficking in small arms and light weapons.
26 Bush administration rejects international treaty on germ warfare and biological weapons.
August 2001
6 Presidential Daily Briefing warns “Bin Ladin [sic] Determined to Strike in U.S.”
9 Bush limits stem cell research to “existing lines.”
September 2001
6 Justice Department drops effort to break up Microsoft, hoping to speed settlement of antitrust lawsuit.
11 Terrorists crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands.
22 Bush signs $15 billion airline bailout.
October 2001
26 Bush signs the USA Patriot Act.
29 Justice Department acknowledges but won’t identify more than one thousand individuals, mostly immigrants, detained since September 11 attacks.
31 Ashcroft authorizes monitoring of attorney-client conversations in terrorism investigations.
November 2001
1 Bush issues executive order blocking the release of presidential records.
13 Bush orders that “enemy combatants” be tried in military tribunals.
14 Justice Department issues regulations allowing illegal immigrants to be detained indefinitely if their release could pose “serious adverse foreign-policy consequences.”
December 2001
11 White House commission recommends privatizing Social Security.
12 Bush informs congressional leaders that he intends to pull out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty unilaterally.
18 Congress passes $26.4 billion “No Child Left Behind” Act.
27 Bush repeals “responsible contractor rule” that had required scrutiny of safety and environmental law violations in the awarding of federal contracts.
January 2002
11 First Afghan prisoners arrive at “Camp X-Ray” in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares them “unlawful combatants” with no rights under the Geneva Convention.
16 Cheney refuses to provide details of his multiple meetings with Enron officials.
25 In a memo to the president, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales writes that “the new paradigm” of the war on terror “renders obsolete” the Geneva Conventions’ “strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions.”
February 2002
14 White House unveils its “Clear Skies” initiative calling for voluntary reductions of three major pollutants; the plan would delay by a decade reductions required under existing law.
15 Bush approves Yucca Mountain—located ninety miles northwest of Las Vegas—as the nation’s lone repository for high-level nuclear waste.
28 IRS records reveal increases in audits of the working poor; audits of large corporations and the rich drop to all-time lows.
March 2002
1 News reports reveal that Bush activated a “shadow government” after September 11 attacks without telling Congress; civilian administrators are being sequestered in underground bunkers in case of a terrorist attack.
5 Bush’s welfare reform proposal advises paying “workfare” recipients less than the minimum wage.
10 Pentagon’s “Nuclear Posture Review” calls for new, “low-yield” nuclear weapons and lists seven “rogue” nations as possible targets for a nuclear attack.
27 Bush signs McCain-Feingold bill banning soft money behind closed doors, then departs immediately for a fund-raising trip.
April 2002
2 Bush administration opposes the reappointment of climatologist Robert Watson as head on the UN Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change.
5 Office of Management and Budget prevents the EPA from declaring a public health emergency over dangerous asbestos fibers that come from a Montana mine and are used in insulation throughout the country.
12 Bush officials express support for the ouster of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez; a day after Chavez returns to power, White House admits that U.S. officials had met with coup plotters.
17 Administration insiders admit military tactical errors allowed Osama bin Laden to escape December 2001 battle at Tora Bora.
May 2002
3 EPA alters its definition of “fill material” to allow coal companies to dump rubble from “mountaintop removal” mining into valleys and streams.
6 Bush voids the U.S. signature on the treaty to establish an International Criminal Court.
23 Senate joins the House in approving “fast-track” trade authority for the president.
30 Ashcroft removes restrictions on domestic spying by the FBI in counterterrorism investigations; new guidelines permit monitoring of political and religious groups without probable cause.
June 2002
1 President unveils “Bush doctrine” of preemptive war in a speech at West Point.
5 National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration weakens standards on under-inflated tires despite problems at Firestone that caused hundreds of deaths.
10 Ashcroft announces that alleged “dirty bomber” José Padilla, an American citizen arrested a month earlier at Chicago’s O’Hare airport, is being held indefinitely as an “enemy combatant.”
July 2002
14 SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt says he’ll release the entire files on the investigation into Bush’s sale of $800,000 in Harken Energy stock if asked by the president; the president doesn’t ask.
15 Bush administration unveils the “Terrorism Information and Prevention System,” or Operation TIPS, a toll-free hotline encouraging meter readers and truck drivers to report “suspicious activity.”
22 State Department announces it will withhold $34 million in international family planning funds from the United Nations.
25 Bush threatens to veto Homeland Security bill unless workers in the new department are stripped of civil service protections.
August 2002
9 Bush administration issues new medical privacy regulations that don’t require patient consent to share records with insurance and pharmaceutical companies or restrict use of medical information for marketing purposes.
26 In a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Cheney says there is “no doubt” Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction and that Iraq could have nuclear weapons “fairly soon.”
September 2002
5 Bush administration presents “Healthy Forests Initiative” that would allow more logging of old-growth forests by limiting environmental impact reviews and public comment.
19 Bush asks Congress for authority to use “all means that he determines to be appropriate” against Iraq.
October 2002
5 North Korea admits to having secret nuclear weapons program; Bush officials don’t publicly disclose the news until Oct. 16.
8 Bush invokes the Taft-Hartley Act to end an 11-day lockout of longshore workers that has shut down West Coast ports.
November 2002
5 Harvey Pitt resigns after failing to disclose that newly appointed accounting oversight board chairman William Webster had headed the audit committee of a firm accused of accounting improprieties and fraud.
20 Pentagon defends development of the “Total Information Awareness” system, a scheme developed by Iran-contra veteran John Poindexter to mine private data for terrorism clues.
27 Bush names Henry Kissinger to head independent commission investigating September 11 attacks.
December 2002
6 Bush dismisses treasury secretary Paul O’Neill and economic adviser Lawrence Lindsey as the unemployment rate hits 6 percent.
17 Bush orders initial missile defense system to be in place by 2004.
19 Office of Management and Budget instructs Environmental Protection Agency to value the lives of senior citizens at 63 percent that of younger Americans in a cost-benefit analysis of imposing new air pollution regulations.
January 2003
9 Transportation Security Administration bars 56,000 airport screeners from unionizing.
10 Bush administration issues guidelines that could exempt up to twenty million acres of “isolated” wetlands and seasonal streams from protection under the Clean Water Act.
15 Bush denounces affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan as an unconstitutional “quota system.”
29 Bush claims in his State of the Union speech that Saddam Hussein “recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”
30 Bush administration seeks exemptions to international treaty banning the ozone-depleting chemical methyl bromide for use on golf courses, among other things.
February 2003
5 Secretary of State Colin Powell appears before the UN Security Council to make the case for war with Iraq.
March 2003
7 U.N. official exposes as fakes documents showing Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Niger.
8 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers awards no-bid contract with a $7 billion limit to a Halliburton subsidiary for fighting possible oil well fires in Iraq.
19 War on Iraq begins.
27 Department of Labor proposes new overtime rules that could strip millions of extra pay by increasing the number of exempt “white-collar” workers.
April 2003
7 Education Secretary Rod Paige says he prefers schools that have a “strong appreciation for the values of the Christian community.”
12 Congress approves Bush’s request for $79 billion to fund the Iraq War and reconstruction.
28 Bush administration refuses to sign international anti-tobacco treaty without a “reservation clause” allowing any country to opt out of portions it doesn’t like.
May 2003
1 Aboard an aircraft carrier—with a banner touting “Mission Accomplished” as his backdrop—Bush declares victory in Iraq.
22 Bush issues an executive order shielding oil companies in Iraq from legal liability.
27 One third of the prevention funds in the $15 billion AIDS bill signed by Bush are earmarked for abstinence education.
28 Bush signs $350 billion tax cut-half the size of his original proposal-slashing tax rates on dividends and capital gains.
29 On a trip to Poland, Bush says: “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories … for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.”
June 2003
2 FCC increases media ownership cap, allowing one company to own TV stations reaching up to 45 percent of the country, and lifts the ban on a single company’s owning newspapers, TV stations, and radio stations in the same city.
2 Inspector general finds that the Justice Department violated the civil rights of hundreds of immigrants detained after 9/11.
25 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rejects California’s request to cancel $12 billion in long-term contracts signed during the state’s energy crisis despite evidence of market manipulation by energy companies.
July 2003
1 Bush administration suspends military aid to thirty-five countries that refused to grant U.S. citizens immunity before the International Criminal Court.
14 Columnist Robert Novak outs the wife of retired ambassador Joseph Wilson as a CIA agent after discussions with “two senior administration officials.”
15 SEC chairman William Donaldson endorses House bill seeking to limit the ability of state regulators to oversee the securities industry.
24 Congress publishes report on September 11 attacks, but the White House omits major portions (reportedly about Saudi Arabia) for “national security” reasons.
28 Congress exposes Pentagon plans to create a futures trading market to forecast terrorist attacks.
August 2003
9 EPA inspector general finds that the agency downplayed health risks from the collapse of the World Trade Center under pressure from the White House.
20 Ashcroft begins nationwide tour to promote the Patriot Act.
27 EPA repeals “New Source Review” rule that had required electric utilities to install anti-pollution equipment when making major upgrades at coal-fired power plants.
September 2003
1 Job losses over the past three years top 2.7 million.
7 Bush asks Congress for another $87 billion to fund the occupation of Iraq.
17 Bush admits there is no evidence tying Saddam Hussein to September 11 attacks.
22 FCC approves the merger of Univision and Hispanic Broadcasting, handing over 80 percent of the Spanish-language radio and television market to one company.
October 2003
21 Congress bans late-term abortions.
29 U.N. official warns of “a palpable risk that Afghanistan will again turn into a failed state, this time in the hands of drug cartels and narco-terrorists.”
31 13,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants are in deportation proceedings as a result of special registration programs; none has been charged in connection to terrorism.
November 2003
21 Senate blocks energy bill, a massive boondoggle that traces its origins to Cheney’s secretive energy task force and would provide billions of dollars in subsidies to some of Bush’s biggest supporters in the oil and gas, coal, and electric utility industries.
23 FBI admits collecting intelligence on antiwar protesters.
24 Congressional Republicans and the White House agree to a “compromise” media ownership cap of 39 percent—ensuring that neither Viacom nor News Corp. will be forced to sell any television stations.
25 Senate passes $400 billion, Bush-backed Medicare bill, which guarantees a prescription drug benefit starting in 2006 but prevents the government from negotiating lower prices with pharmaceutical companies.
December 2003
3 Medicare chief Tom Scully announces he’s stepping down to consider job offers from three lobbying and two investment firms.
23 Bush administration opens 300,000 acres of old-growth timber in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest to logging.
30 After first case of “mad cow” disease is detected in the United States, USDA bans sale of “downer” cattle—a measure quashed by the agency just weeks earlier.
January 2004
5 Cheney and Justice Antonin Scalia go duck hunting together three weeks after the Supreme Court agrees to hear a case about the vice president’s energy task force records.
16 During a congressional recess, Bush appoints Charles Pickering—whose nomination has been blocked twice by the Senate—to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
22 Interior Department opens nearly nine million acres of wilderness on Alaska’s North Slope to oil drilling.
23 Chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay resigns, saying he doesn’t believe Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction ever existed.
29 Bush administration reports that the new Medicare law will cost at least $530 billion over 10 years, 30 percent more than Congress was told it would cost.
February 2004
6 Bush relents and appoints commission on pre-war intelligence, calls for it to report findings after the presidential election.
9 President’s Council of Economic Advisers suggests positions at fast-food restaurants should be counted as manufacturing jobs.
18 A group of 60 top U.S. scientists, including a dozen Nobel Prize winners, accuses the Bush administration of “misrepresenting and suppressing scientific knowledge for political purposes.”
23 Rod Paige calls the National Education Association a “terrorist organization.”
March 2004
12 Medicare actuary says Bush administration threatened to fire him if he told Congress that the White House Medicare plan would cost more than $400 billion.
24 At the Radio and Television Correspondents’ dinner Bush presents slides of himself looking under tables and out the windows of the Oval Office while commenting “Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere!” and “Nope, no weapons over there!”
April 2004
1 Bush signs the “Unborn Victims of Violence Act.”
2 Bush and Cheney appear at a private retreat for the more than five hundred “Rangers” and “Pioneers” who have collected at least $100,000 for the president’s campaign.
10 After two years of stonewalling, Bush releases declassified version of the Aug. 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Briefing warning “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U.S.”
13 In just the third prime-time press conference of his term, Bush is stumped when asked to name one mistake he’s committed since September 11. He replies, “I’m sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with an answer, but it hasn’t yet.”
28 CBS television airs first images of torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison.
28 Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz tells Congress the number of U.S soldiers who have died in Iraq is “approximately 500, of which—I can get the exact numbers—approximately 350 are combat deaths.” The actual figures: 722 soldiers killed, 521 of them in combat.
29 Bush and Cheney appear together behind closed doors in the Oval Office to answer questions from commissioners on the September 11 attacks panel.
30 Sinclair Broadcasting refuses to air “Nightline” broadcast reading the names of the U.S. dead in Iraq on its ABC affiliates.
May 2004
4 Army acknowledges it is investigating at least thirty-five cases of abuse or torture of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.
6 FDA blocks RU-486, the “morning after pill,” from being sold over the counter.
19 General Accounting Office rules that taxpayer-funded “video news releases” touting the Medicare bill are illegal covert propaganda.
20 Bush campaign fundraising haul hits the $200 million mark.
June 2004
3 CIA Director George Tenet resigns because of the “well-being of my wonderful family—nothing more, nothing less.”
8 John Ashcroft refuses to give the Senate Judiciary Committee a Justice Department memo outlining a legal justification for the torture of suspected terrorists.
16 U.S. commission investigating September 11 finds “no credible evidence” linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks; Dick Cheney continues to claim “overwhelming evidence” of a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
24 Supreme Court rules that Dick Cheney doesn’t have to give up records of secretive energy task force, sends case back to a lower court.
28 In a secret ceremony—held two days ahead of schedule to thwart attacks—United States hands over formal sovereignty of Iraq to interim government; U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer declares Iraq “a much better place” and immediately leaves the country.
28 Supreme Court rules against the Bush administration, insisting that “enemy combatants”—whether U.S. citizen or foreigners—must be allowed to challenge their imprisonment before an American judge.
July 2004
8 Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge warns that Al Qaeda may strike on Election Day, seeks advice from Justice Department on necessary steps to postpone the election in case of a terrorist attack.
15 Republican-controlled National Labor Relations Board reverses earlier decision and rules that graduate teaching assistants at private universities do not have the right to organize unions.
20 Bush administration lawyers move to block lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies and medical device makers, arguing that consumers may not seek damages for injuries received from products approved by the FDA.
22 Congress passes resolution declaring that genocide is taking place in the Darfur region of Sudan; Washington Post characterizes action taken by the Bush administration to stop the killing as “murderously modest.”
28 After 24 years in Afghanistan, the humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders pulls out of the country; the group criticizes U.S. forces for endangering aid workers by using humanitarian assistance as “a support for its military and political ambitions.”
30 Republican Party requires a signed endorsement of the president before giving out tickets to New Mexico campaign rally starring Dick Cheney.
30 Bush issues 20 recess appointments, skirting Senate approval to install, among others, a new head of the Federal Trade Commission, a new manufacturing czar, and three new ambassadors—two of whom are major Bush fundraisers.
August 2004
1 Two days after the Democratic convention, Tom Ridge raises terror alert level to “orange” for New York and Washington; heightened security based on three- to four-year-old intelligence.
5 At a ceremony to sign a $417 billion Defense appropriations bill, Bush tells the assembled Pentagon brass: “Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
11 With two months left in the fiscal year, federal deficit hits a record $395.8 billion.
15 FBI acknowledges interviewing dozens of people in at least six states about protests planned for the Republican National Convention; officials insist they’re only targeting crimes, not political dissent.
24 Bush-Cheney campaign’s top outside counsel admits advising the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
27 For third consecutive year, more Americans in poverty and without health insurance; national poverty rate hits 12.5 percent, 45 million people lack health coverage.
September 2004
7 Dick Cheney declares at a campaign stop in Iowa: “It’s absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, that we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we’ll get hit again.”
8 1,001 U.S. soldiers killed during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
13 President Bush and House Republicans allow the federal ban on assault weapons to expire.
13 Iranian official announces that the country could resume uranium enrichment “within a few months”; Britain’s Royal Institute of International Affairs concludes “the real long-term geopolitical winner of the ‘War on Terror’ could be Iran.”
23 Donald Rumsfeld hints that Iraqi election may be limited to three-fourths of the country because of increasing violence. “If there were to be an area where the extremists focused during the election period, so be it,” he testifies before the Senate. “You have the rest of the election and you go on. Life’s not perfect.”
23 Standing beside Prime Minister Allawi in the Rose Garden, Bush claims “nearly 100,000 fully trained and equipped Iraqi soldiers, police officers, and other security personnel are working today”; Pentagon documents show only 8,169 have completed full, eight-week training.
25 Iraqi Health Ministry statistics show U.S. and allied forces and Iraqi police are killing twice the number of Iraqis—mostly civilians—as the insurgents; officials announce that Health Ministry will no longer provide casualty statistics to reporters.
October 2004
2 One-third of “individual ready reserve” soldiers called up by the Army to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan fail to report for duty.
6 Chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer reports that Iraq had no biological or chemical weapons and no nuclear program before the U.S. invasion; in fact, Duelfer finds no evidence that Iraq had produced any WMDs after 1991.
11 International Atomic Energy Agency reports that equipment and low-level radioactive materials that could be used to build nuclear weapons have disappeared from Iraq during the U.S. occupation.
21 Program on International Policy Attitudes shows that vast majorities of Bush supporters believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and gave Al Qaeda “substantial support” or was directly involved in September 11. Bush backers also think the majority of the world supported the U.S. invasion.
22 Aboard Air Force One, with no public ceremony, Bush signs $136 billion corporate tax cut bill—which includes special pork-barrel earmarks for tobacco companies, oil refineries, SUV buyers, Home Depot ceiling fans and much, much more.
24 Iraqi interim government announces that 380 tons of explosives vanished from the Al Qaqaa facility after the U.S. invasion, when the site was not secured despite warnings from U.N. weapons inspectors.
November
2 Election Day.
A version of this timeline originally appeared in Dissent magazine.
</div></div>

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/1539/



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Every day we are told by members of the Bush administration and the lying criminals in the corporate media, that terror is the greatest threat posed to Americans. Well, that’s a load of bullshit! We don’t need a patriot act, we need to act like patriots and remove from office the criminals who scare us, lie to us, endanger us, ignore all REAL threats to our safety and freedom (like the Patriot Act and the US corporate media) and are destroying our great nation! - TvNewsLIES Editor.

The real and imminent dangers to Americans are apparently
unimportant to the Bush administration.

Without realizing it, George W. Bush and his PNAC cronies actually were correct when they said that this nation was in imminent danger. In their attempt to deceive us about Saddam Hussein, they inadvertently made consistent and accurate claims that we were all facing immediate and real threats to our wellbeing. The problem is that they tried to convince us that the imminent danger we faced could be lessened if we invaded Iraq. Bush and company had their wires crossed.

In fact, we the people of the United States face multiple imminent dangers from within our own borders. These threats have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism or hoarded weapons of mass destruction. These threats come directly from the policies of George W. Bush and his supporters in Congress!

The imminent dangers to our well being are not being addressed because of the priorities of the Bush administration. The illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq and the action taking place in Afghanastan now are costing American taxpayers 6 BILLION DOLLARS per month! At the same time, corporate influence on a GOP congress has resulted in legislation that consistently shows disdain for public health and safety. The imminent dangers to us all continue to increase in direct proportion to the Bush Cartel goals of global domination.

The real and imminent dangers to Americans are apparently unimportant to the Bush administration. The huge deficit caused by the war and the tax cuts adequate funding cannot possibly provide adequate funding to decrease or eliminate any of these threats. Partisan legislation and preferential executive policy have allowed other dangers to increase exponentially. Imminent dangers lurk all around us here at home!

TheImminent Dangers:

1.Threats to our health: Thousands of American lives could be saved each year by medical research funded by a small fraction of the cost of the war. Stem cell research has been seriously undermined, and every day hand guns kill Americans with frightening regularity. Sadly, while the NRA remains a major contributor to the GOP, and while medical research remains grossly under funded, in the year 2000, in this country, there were:

28,663 deaths cause by firearms (intentional and non-intentional).
710,760 deaths from heart disease.
533,091 deaths from cancer.
122,009 deaths from chronic low respiratory disease.
2. Threats from an increasingly endangered environment: <span style='font-size: 20pt'>The Bush administration, in several strokes of the pen, has managed to:

Reduce restrictions of toxins in our water systems
Lighten regulations on emissions by coal burning power plants
Ordered the EPA not to conduct any studies that may conflict with the Bush/PNAC administrations agenda to pander to corporations at the expense of the health and safety of the public.
Doctor an EPA report to exclude its findings about the dangers of global warming
Withdraw from the Kyoto Treaty and international efforts to reduce the greenhouse effect.
3. Threats to our basic Constitutional freedoms: Using 9/11 as a cover for the most virulent attack on our civil liberties in history, we now live with the following:</span>
The Patriot Act that has all but eliminated the protections provided to us by the US Constitution. (This act was actually in the planning long before 9/11.)
The public no longer has the right to know what the government is doing! Secrecy protects Bush from divulging information about 9/11, the Cheney energy meetings, the Iraq intelligence fiasco, and the archives of the first Pres. Bush.
Media consolidation threatens the public’s ability to access diverse and complete information and opinion.
Misled and coerced by accusations of being un-American, the Congress abdicated its exclusive responsibility for declaring war. By voting war powers to George W. Bush, the Constitution, once again, has been rendered meaningless.
4. Threats from an insane foreign policy. This administration has made this country feared and hated around the world. This is the result of:

An illegal and immoral war and occupation that are fueling extremist violence and inciting global terror and more acts of terror on our own soil.
Initiating a new nuclear arms race by showing that we do not invade countries with active nuclear programs.
A policy that declares that the US and its chosen allies have the exclusive right to develop weapons of mass destruction. Consider that approximately 3,500 people died within the US as a direct result of terrorism (in Oklahoma City and on 9/11)..
A doctrine that declares that the US has the right to launch pre-emptive, and if necessary, nuclear attacks on nations we suspect are hostile to us.
Playing diplomatic games with N. Korea’s nuclear threat, while refusing diplomatic solutions in Iraq.
An arrogant, self-righteous display of moral superiority that tells the world we can go it alone, without alliances and international agreements..
The abandonment of the war on terror, and the pursuit of domination of the Middle East and its oil.
The undue and self-indulgent influence of neoconservatives on foreign policy.
The intrusion of right wing religious doctrine as an integral part of American policy.
The undermining of the United Nations as a vital peace-keeping organ.
Insistence on American exemption from prosecution for war crimes in the World Court.
This is only a starter list. It is not meant to minimize the threat of foreign terrorism, or to suggest that violent acts against Americans are not real possibilities. But preying on our fears must not be the manipulative device used to ignore the internal imminent threats we face as Americans, and to which this administration is a major contributing factor.

Our national debt is skyrocketing as never before. Homeland security is a necessary and vital expense, but a projected stay of years in Iraq will destroy us as surely as another terrorist attack. Our cities and states are bearing the brunt of the cuts in federal spending needed to finance a war that should never have been. Every facet of American life has been negatively and painfully impacted. It has to stop

Those who oppose the Bush administration and its irresponsible policies must begin to develop a mantra of our own that emphasizes the real threats we face as Americans. It is time to wonder why we are spending more time and money guarding our front door when the real enemies are already in our house.

The focus of the 2004 elections has to challenge the American people to eliminate the threat from within. We have to protect ourselves from the most imminent danger we face: the continued menacing policies of George W. Bush.

Peace,
Jesse - Editor, TvNewsLies.org

American Terror Permit Application
All Enemies, Foreign & Domestic - Therefore, I stand today opposed to my President, and the anti-American, un-Constitutional, unpatriotic Administration for which he serves as figurehead. I will do my part to voice my opposition, educate the populace, diligently support my political causes, and work with others to restore American freedoms to their former glory.
The Myth of Terror
Smoking 'kills five million a year' - Almost five million people died from smoking-related diseases across the world in 2000, researchers estimate. - "But it also stems back to the actions of the tobacco companies, - "They are aggressively marketing their products to developing countries.
TvNewLies.org Tracks Iraq Invasion Media Coverage
TvNewsLies.org Tracks the War Crimes Charges - We don’t mean the Iraqis.
TvNewsLies.org Tracks the New Iraq
Do the Math
Diplomats and Intelligence Officers Resign Over Iraq
Claims of Al Qaeda Links
Claims of Attempts to Acquire Nuclear Material
Military Dissent
The Smoking Gun - Important Read!
Did Iraq Gas the Kurds?
Mental Trauma for the Soldiers
TvNewsLies.org Tracks Busted Blair - England Reacts. Fake, ,dossier, no WMD’s, Bush & PNAC lies.
</div></div>
http://tvnewslies.org/html/imminent_threat.html
G.

sack316
05-08-2010, 10:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's just too bad that everyone doesn't understand how we, and our world, are all being poisoned daily by the results of corporate lobbying, and all of the damage which resulted from a boatload of oil co-hearts in the White House for eight years, not to mention twelve years of Republicans running the show on the hill....</div></div>

ok, even with these points granted, does nobody else see this current correlation:

2009 saw record oil and gas company lobbying in Washington (such lobbying that, IIRC, was to be done away with should Obama be elected). Big oil's profits in Q1 of 2010 compared to that of 2009 increased 82%.

Under democratic leadership, big oil is... well... bigger oil.

Washington runs our country... I'm just starting to wonder who runs Washington (both left and right).

Sack

p.s. kudos for this comment, though Gayle "...then you'll all have to put up with me in the future, railing against Obama in the same way I did against Bush et al"

Qtec
05-08-2010, 01:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What happened was that William Jefferson Clinton.....

..... and as soon as he did the Goremons began the wail of <u>B-B-B-BUT B-B-B-BOOOOSH!</u>!!!</div></div>

"........<u>but Clinton.</u>......".

Q LOL

LWW
05-08-2010, 03:49 PM
Atctually that should be "AIEEEEEE ... FACTS!!!!" coming from you.

LWW

LWW
05-08-2010, 03:50 PM
Thanks for confirming what I said G.

See what a great team we can make together.

LWW