Mark Levin Attacks Bill O’Reilly for Supporting BP Escrow Fund

One of the most astounding self-inflicted political wounds in recent memory has been the insane criticism of the $20 billion escrow fund set up by President Obama as a “shakedown.” And now another high profile wingnut pundit, Mark Levin, is attacking Bill O’Reilly for trying to bring some sense into the discussion: Mark Levin attacks ‘phony, populist idiot’ O’Reilly over BP fund.

“Let me explain something to you, Mr. Cable TV!” says Levin, not using O’Reilly’s name. “British Petroleum was in the back pocket of the Democrat Party! It gave Obama a million dollars. It backs cap and trade!” And he defends Rep. Joe Barton for “speaking the truth.”

He may have been inarticulate about it. There was no need to apologize to BP. I get that. But if you have an IQ over 12, you get his point, which was: we can’t have a president with the power to decide when a company has to cough up tens of billions of dollars, without legislation, without oversight… this is why we have a rule of law, to sort these things out. Not a president who brings this people before him and threatens them!

When Bill O’Reilly is the voice of reason, the lunatics truly are in charge.

Jump to bottom

90 comments
1 _RememberTonyC  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:43:21am

Bill O'Reilly was always a pretty fair pundit. He took plenty of heat from the right for many of his positions over the years. He leans to the right, but is mostly fair. It's easy to cherry pick some of his positions and say he's far right, but he has a long record of criticizing both sides.

2 Targetpractice  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:43:24am

Bill O'Reilly...the voice of sanity...oh, this is heavy.

3 jamesfirecat  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:43:30am

Feeding Frenzy all sharks and Lawyers get in the pool!

4 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:44:52am

I wish this would stop. This is not doing any good for the image that the right is gone nutty. As long as there are people like O'Reilly pulling stunts like this, there is no way we are going to be able to lump the right into some monolithic knuckle-dragging throwback.

Crap like this will make it harder for the left.

5 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:49:56am

re: #1 _RememberTonyC

Bill O'Reilly was always a pretty fair pundit. He took plenty of heat from the right for many of his positions over the years. He leans to the right, but is mostly fair. It's easy to cherry pick some of his positions and say he's far right, but he has a long record of criticizing both sides.

Agreed. O'Reilly is actually trying to find out what can actually be done. 'Levin and the Wingnuts' (which would be a good name for a band) just want to play their latest 'sure to be a smash' song "Obama's Chicago Socialist Shakedown!1".

6 Randall Gross  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:50:40am

Mark: the fucking ocean is not supposed to be this color - BP did it.

Image: USA7_TMO_2010170_lrg.jpg
Warning: 10MB Photo link

7 Kragar  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:52:38am

I see a wingnut slap fight of epic proportions in the brewing.

8 OldnGrumpy  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:54:21am

OT but wow.

World Cup

Portugal 7

N.Korea 0

I think I saw this in Webster's dictionary as the definition of ass-whupping

9 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:54:26am

"...without legislation, without oversight"

I get it, corporations should be left alone, we just need more government regulation of government

10 Vambo  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:55:36am

Mr. Cable TV!! Damn liberal Hollywood showbusiness pundits and their television shows!

Is there anything these people don't hate?

11 Drogheda  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:55:46am

re: #6 Thanos

Mark: the fucking ocean is not supposed to be this color - BP did it.

Image: USA7_TMO_2010170_lrg.jpg
Warning: 10MB Photo link

Is that the sheen of oil on the surface of the Gulf?

12 jamesfirecat  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:55:56am

re: #9 ralphieboy

"...without legislation, without oversight"

I get it, corporations should be left alone, we just need more government regulation of government

Well yeah, laws fly through our legislative branch like shit through a goose these days!

13 Kragar  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:56:50am

re: #10 Vambo

Mr. Cable TV!! Damn liberal Hollywood showbusiness pundits and their television shows!

Is there anything these people don't hate?

Is Mr. Cable TV related to Mr. Telephone Man?

14 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:57:22am

This is winutageddon, which I thought would not hit until after the mid-term elections, already descending on us.

This is a time when the pure of ideology must be separated from those who would ease up for a second on criticising Obama for anything and everything he might do.

And thus spake Gideon: those who went to the shore and lapped the tarballs with their tongues like dogs were cast out, but those who picked up tarballs with the cupped hand were chosen.

15 Randall Gross  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:57:50am

Sara says Rahm's a liar for saying that GOP supports the Barton fringe....

Palin tweeted, "RahmEmanuel=as shallow/narrowminded/political/irresponsible as they come,to falsely claim Barton's BP comment is 'GOP philosophy," adding, "Rahm, u lie."

[Link: www.cbsnews.com...]

//roaches -- light switch on comes to mind...

in this AP interactive widget you can see Oil donations to GOP vs Dems in one page...

[Link: hosted.ap.org...]

16 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:58:23am

re: #12 jamesfirecat

Well yeah, laws fly through our legislative branch like shit through a goose these days!


Or do we need more corporate regulation of government activity? After all, we all know that the private sector is much more efficient...

17 Batman  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:58:46am

Wait, if BP is best buds with Obama, wouldn't it not be a shakedown? It would just be a favor among friends. No large corporations were harmed during the discussion of this fund. You can sleep well again, republicans.

18 Randall Gross  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:58:48am

re: #11 Drogheda

Yes, it's from NASA -- shows how large this ugly disaster has become.

19 garhighway  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:02:57am

re: #17 nonsense

Wait, if BP is best buds with Obama, wouldn't it not be a shakedown? It would just be a favor among friends. No large corporations were harmed during the discussion of this fund. You can sleep well again, republicans.

Please. You want consistent, logical thought from these people?

Get real.

20 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:03:22am

re: #17 nonsense

Wait, if BP is best buds with Obama, wouldn't it not be a shakedown? It would just be a favor among friends. No large corporations were harmed during the discussion of this fund. You can sleep well again, republicans.

Obama can be shaking BP down or climbing into bed with them, as the need to frenzy the base demands. Have you forgotten Doublethink?

21 Summer Seale  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:04:18am

I'd like to point something out which I haven't seen anyone else do as of yet about this:

These idiotic comments from Barton and others are coming from the party that said that the Presidency has extended powers over the other two branches during a time of war, crisis, and emergencies.

22 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:04:43am

I generally don't agree with the likes of Mark Levin, but he is correct in saying that this was a shakedown of the highest order. There are already numerous laws in place to make BP pay for any and all costs involved with this disaster. This was more of an attempt by "O" to make it look like he's truly doing something. Now he has a $20 billion slush fund to dole out how and when he sees fit to improve his image.

23 The Curmudgeon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:04:49am

Charles says: "When Bill O’Reilly is the voice of reason ..."

He rarely is. In cases like this he leans populist, to posture as a guy who's "looking out for the folks." He's entertaining, but his thinking is all over the place.

24 Virginia Plain  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:04:49am

re: #6 Thanos

Mark: the fucking ocean is not supposed to be this color - BP did it.

Image: USA7_TMO_2010170_lrg.jpg
Warning: 10MB Photo link

Right click the link and click Open In New Tab, otherwise it will take forever to load.

What a stark contrast to the surrounding blue around it.

25 Batman  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:06:00am

re: #22 FullRoller

Or he has a fund to help out those affected, and he has it months and months earlier than the legal system could have gotten it, when they need it most. Be more cynical, please.

26 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:06:04am

I don't think it was a shakedown, but I think BP agreed because it capped its liability. It may be difficult to get more from them in the future.

27 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:06:13am

re: #21 Summer

I'd like to point something out which I haven't seen anyone else do as of yet about this:

These idiotic comments from Barton and others are coming from the party that said that the Presidency has extended powers over the other two branches during a time of war, crisis, and emergencies.

True, but NOT extended powers over independent businesses such as BP, GM, Chrysler, AIG, etc.....

28 Lidane  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:06:29am

re: #14 ralphieboy

This is winutageddon, which I thought would not hit until after the mid-term elections, already descending on us.

Nah. This started back in 2008. You could see it back during the election, starting with Obama's nomination and in the first days after he won. It just took the wingnuts a while to really get going.

Charles is right-- when BillO comes across as a moderate, rational voice, you know that we've gone through the looking glass.

29 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:07:33am

re: #21 Summer

I'd like to point something out which I haven't seen anyone else do as of yet about this:

These idiotic comments from Barton and others are coming from the party that said that the Presidency has extended powers over the other two branches during a time of war, crisis, and emergencies.

Silly Summer: Those power were only for use by Real Americans, not by a Kenyan Socialist.

/Wingnut Logic

30 Lidane  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:07:48am

re: #22 FullRoller

I generally don't agree with the likes of Mark Levin, but he is correct in saying that this was a shakedown of the highest order.

Bullshit. If anything, it was an attractive offer for BP, since getting any more money out of them in the future will be that much harder for the government.

31 Vambo  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:07:50am

re: #6 Thanos

Mark: the fucking ocean is not supposed to be this color - BP did it.

Image: USA7_TMO_2010170_lrg.jpg
Warning: 10MB Photo link

am I really seeing this? Miles and miles of coastline already poisoned. I swear, I don't usually get like this (over politics), but looking at this picture and then seeing comments from the Bachmann-Barton Overdrive makes me literally want to punch something.

32 Vambo  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:08:24am

re: #22 FullRoller

I generally don't agree with the likes of Mark Levin, but he is correct in saying that this was a shakedown of the highest order. There are already numerous laws in place to make BP pay for any and all costs involved with this disaster. This was more of an attempt by "O" to make it look like he's truly doing something. Now he has a $20 billion slush fund to dole out how and when he sees fit to improve his image.

oh, sod off.

33 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:08:53am

re: #25 nonsense

Or he has a fund to help out those affected, and he has it months and months earlier than the legal system could have gotten it, when they need it most. Be more cynical, please.

You missed the point. The President of the U.S. has no legal authority to force a corporation to simply "pony up" in advance to a government controlled fund like that. That's what the legal system is for.

34 lawhawk  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:10:16am

re: #22 FullRoller

This isn't "his" slush fund - and it isn't the government that is going to be administering it.

BP is setting aside the $20 billion (which is going to be insufficient considering that the true costs for the oil spill will likely be 5x as much in direct and indirect costs from losses due to the spill) as compensation for those who have suffered losses.

The fund will be administered by Kenneth Feinberg - who has previously handled the 9/11 victim compensation fund, the Ground Zero workers comp fund, and the executive compensation pay issue.

He's as fair as they come - and he is the 3d party administrator for the fund.

Obama does not have anything to do with the fund.

If anything, Obama is doing BP a favor by letting them set up this fund (rather than deal with thousands of individual lawsuits - this consolidates and should potentially streamline claims and distribution of funds). And BP is doing Obama a favor by letting it look like Obama is doing something tangible to deal with the oil spill mess and cleanup.

But as I have already said - it isn't going to be enough, and the costs may well be far more than the $20 billion.

35 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:10:19am

re: #22 FullRoller

There are already numerous laws in place to make BP pay for any and all costs involved with this disaster.

One could make that argument, but one could also point out that courts can take years to process claims, this is an attempt to get the aid to people who need it when they need it and not after they have gone bankrupt.

36 albusteve  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:10:37am

re: #33 FullRoller

You missed the point. The President of the U.S. has no legal authority to force a corporation to simply "pony up" in advance to a government controlled fund like that. That's what the legal system is for.

what difference does it make what you call it?....the time for splitting hairs is over....the 20b is a done deal...move on

37 Batman  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:10:43am

re: #33 FullRoller

I got YOUR point and you're just being cynical. Obama didn't make anyone do shit. At all. They agreed because it helps their image and they hope they'll get less penalties later. THE point is helping out those affected in the gulf. That's priority number one, so put your hatred of the president aside and think about those folks whose lives are being totally destroyed by BP.

38 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:10:44am

re: #32 Vambo

oh, sod off.


Congratulations on a well thought out, reasoned response.

39 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:11:05am

re: #28 Lidane

Nah. This started back in 2008. You could see it back during the election, starting with Obama's nomination and in the first days after he won. It just took the wingnuts a while to really get going.

Charles is right-- when BillO comes across as a moderate, rational voice, you know that we've gone through the looking glass.

Actually, I think there is also an internal dynamic at Fox News at work here as well. Bill O'Reilly heads Fox's flagship program, the one with the most of the biggest name guests and the best ratings. As such, he no longer needs to be an attack dog all the time. With Glenn Beck taking over that role, O'Reilly can take an "elder newsman" role.

Am I on to something here, or just talking out my ass?

40 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:11:18am

re: #34 lawhawk

Good luck collecting it now. This fund was short sighted and I'm sure BP agreed to it only to limit its future liability.

41 Kragar  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:11:22am

You know these same bastards would be patting each other on the back about the strong executive leadership if Bush had gotten BP to pony up the money.

42 albusteve  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:11:56am

re: #38 FullRoller

Congratulations on a well thought out, reasoned response.

you're not doing too good yourself

43 Vambo  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:12:55am

re: #38 FullRoller

Congratulations on a well thought out, reasoned response.

LOL @ the idea of someone like you talking to me about being "well-thought out" and "reasoned".

44 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:13:09am

re: #40 Baier

Good luck collecting it now. This fund was short sighted and I'm sure BP agreed to it only to limit its future liability.

You may well be correct. But, I have yet to see any example of the Obama administration abiding by and "limits" or "caps" when it comes to government control over the private sector.

45 Summer Seale  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:13:47am

re: #27 FullRoller

True, but NOT extended powers over independent businesses such as BP, GM, Chrysler, AIG, etc...

I disagree. What we saw was real politics at play - the backroom strongarm deal played out live on the world stage. And this time, instead of getting very little done or carrying on as usual, Obama squeezed like a true Scot and wrung everything he could from them to recompense the country.

There was nothing wrong with it. It was the bully pulpit and he used it well, and he got something which wasn't exactly forthcoming from BP, which bore the full responsibility of what is happening since months.

He didn't put a gun to their heads; he put the public to their heads and said: "Guess what? Everyone is watching you right now. Better do the right thing for once and clean up your fucking mess."

46 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:13:58am

re: #39 Dark_Falcon

Actually, I think there is also an internal dynamic at Fox News at work here as well. Bill O'Reilly heads Fox's flagship program, the one with the most of the biggest name guests and the best ratings. As such, he no longer needs to be an attack dog all the time. With Glenn Beck taking over that role, O'Reilly can take an "elder newsman" role.

Am I on to something here, or just talking out my ass?


It gets them big "fair and balanced" points in any case.

47 lawhawk  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:14:13am

re: #40 Baier

I don't know about short sighted - it certainly is in BP's interest to limit its liability - but it wont stop the lawsuits. You can still opt out, but the fund should speed compensation if it operates anything like the other funds that Feinberg has administered to date.

9/11 victims could still opt out of the fund and seek compensation via lawsuits and some did - but they're still in the process of filing and taking the various defendants to court. The fund was a quicker payout - and that's the benefit - quicker payout, but not as much money available.

48 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:14:35am

re: #42 albusteve

you're not doing too good yourself

Yes, I suppose that I could resort to 2 word insults and name calling instead of an actual thought process, but I decline to do so.

49 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:14:43am

re: #34 lawhawk

This isn't "his" slush fund - and it isn't the government that is going to be administering it.

BP is setting aside the $20 billion (which is going to be insufficient considering that the true costs for the oil spill will likely be 5x as much in direct and indirect costs from losses due to the spill) as compensation for those who have suffered losses.

The fund will be administered by Kenneth Feinberg - who has previously handled the 9/11 victim compensation fund, the Ground Zero workers comp fund, and the executive compensation pay issue.

He's as fair as they come - and he is the 3d party administrator for the fund.

Obama does not have anything to do with the fund.

If anything, Obama is doing BP a favor by letting them set up this fund (rather than deal with thousands of individual lawsuits - this consolidates and should potentially streamline claims and distribution of funds). And BP is doing Obama a favor by letting it look like Obama is doing something tangible to deal with the oil spill mess and cleanup.

But as I have already said - it isn't going to be enough, and the costs may well be far more than the $20 billion.

See that, Fullroller? That is a well reasoned, but conservative response to the BP fund. Please take note.

50 Batman  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:14:53am

re: #44 FullRoller

You may well be correct. But, I have yet to see any example of the Obama administration abiding by and "limits" or "caps" when it comes to government control over the private sector.

Yet you've seen no examples of Obama not abiding by such "limits or caps." Burden of proof is on you, bud.

51 Vambo  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:15:08am

re: #39 Dark_Falcon

Actually, I think there is also an internal dynamic at Fox News at work here as well. Bill O'Reilly heads Fox's flagship program, the one with the most of the biggest name guests and the best ratings. As such, he no longer needs to be an attack dog all the time. With Glenn Beck taking over that role, O'Reilly can take an "elder newsman" role.

Am I on to something here, or just talking out my ass?

I was happily shocked when Bill O took a supportive stand for gay marriage in the early 2000's. Curmudgeon is right, the guy is just all over the place.

52 Killgore Trout  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:15:45am

re: #26 Baier

I don't think it was a shakedown, but I think BP agreed because it capped its liability. It may be difficult to get more from them in the future.

Nope, this doesn't cap their liability for future damages. They were very explicit about that.

53 jamesfirecat  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:15:49am

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

Obama can be shaking BP down or climbing into bed with them, as the need to frenzy the base demands. Have you forgotten Doublethink?

Maybe he can be doing both at the same time, maybe BP likes it rough in bed...

DRILL ME HARDER, HARDER!

54 prairiefire  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:15:50am

re: #45 Summer

Well said. I particularly like the "true Scot" phrase.

55 KingKenrod  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:15:59am

re: #34 lawhawk

This isn't "his" slush fund - and it isn't the government that is going to be administering it.

BP is setting aside the $20 billion (which is going to be insufficient considering that the true costs for the oil spill will likely be 5x as much in direct and indirect costs from losses due to the spill) as compensation for those who have suffered losses.

The fund will be administered by Kenneth Feinberg - who has previously handled the 9/11 victim compensation fund, the Ground Zero workers comp fund, and the executive compensation pay issue.

He's as fair as they come - and he is the 3d party administrator for the fund.

Obama does not have anything to do with the fund.

If anything, Obama is doing BP a favor by letting them set up this fund (rather than deal with thousands of individual lawsuits - this consolidates and should potentially streamline claims and distribution of funds). And BP is doing Obama a favor by letting it look like Obama is doing something tangible to deal with the oil spill mess and cleanup.

But as I have already said - it isn't going to be enough, and the costs may well be far more than the $20 billion.

Does Obama have the authority to to shield BP from lawsuits?

56 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:16:02am

re: #49 Dark_Falcon

See that, Fullroller? That is a well reasoned, but conservative response to the BP fund. Please take note.

Yep, I agree.

57 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:16:24am

re: #46 ralphieboy

It gets them big "fair and balanced" points in any case.

True, though in Fox's defense it does make The O'Reilly Factor more balanced in some ways.

58 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:16:35am

re: #47 lawhawk

If I'm not mistaken, and I may be, federal law limits damages well under $20 billion for a spill as a result of the Valdez spill. I hope BP pays for it all, of course, and I don't fault the president, but in six months, I wonder if many will agree that this was a win.

59 FullRoller  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:17:05am

Time to go to work, y'all enjoy yourselves.

60 darthstar  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:17:44am

This is like one of those science fiction movies where the nanobots attack their mother...lovely.

61 lawhawk  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:18:17am

re: #55 KingKenrod

In a word? No.

BP is subject to federal law as it is on the books and its interpretation and administration as currently in effect. That includes potential penalties, liability, and costs.

62 Charles Johnson  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:18:41am

Gotta love it. No matter how politically disastrous a far right position may be, there will always be lots of wingnuts to loudly defend it.

63 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:18:49am

re: #33 FullRoller

You missed the point. The President of the U.S. has no legal authority to force a corporation to simply "pony up" in advance to a government controlled fund like that. That's what the legal system is for.

Fine. Prove that he forced BP to pay this money, or STFU.

Fucking wingnuts.

64 albusteve  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:19:06am

re: #48 FullRoller

Yes, I suppose that I could resort to 2 word insults and name calling instead of an actual thought process, but I decline to do so.

not referring to insults, rather to your empty, uninformed arguments

65 MrSilverDragon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:19:25am

re: #22 FullRoller

I generally don't agree with the likes of Mark Levin, but he is correct in saying that this was a shakedown of the highest order. There are already numerous laws in place to make BP pay for any and all costs involved with this disaster. This was more of an attempt by "O" to make it look like he's truly doing something. Now he has a $20 billion slush fund to dole out how and when he sees fit to improve his image.

There's probably a few loopholes to those laws that are in place as well (this is merely speculation, I don't know those laws, and IANAL). However, there's one thing I will call this $20 billion dollar fund, and "shakedown" isn't the term I'd use.

A good start. Now lets see how to proceed.

66 Targetpractice  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:20:07am

re: #60 darthstar

This is like one of those science fiction movies where the nanobots attack their mother...lovely.

I was thinking more like the Lost in Space movie, about the Space Spiders.

"Ew. They eat their wounded."

67 cliffster  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:20:11am

Pretty interesting situation. European company, in the Gulf of Mexico, off the US coast. It's hard to say what is legally doable when it comes down to it. What if a judge orders BP to do X, Y, or Z to their equipment out there, and they say no? Obama is leveraging a giant PR concern for BP to get them to do something. I think that's a good idea considering the grey area we'd be in if we got lawyers involved instead.

68 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:21:01am

re: #52 Killgore Trout

Nope, this doesn't cap their liability for future damages. They were very explicit about that.

I'll believe it when I see it.

69 darthstar  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:21:56am

re: #66 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

I was thinking more like the Lost in Space movie, about the Space Spiders.

"Ew. They eat their wounded."

Yep...same image I was thinking about.

70 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:22:00am

re: #68 Baier

I'll believe it when I see it.

When you see what? This isn't a secret. It was explicitly stated that this doesn't cap liability.

71 jamesfirecat  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:22:15am

re: #60 darthstar

This is like one of those science fiction movies where the nanobots attack their mother...lovely.


In my youth, enormous progress had been made in the field of
cloning. But while technically feasible, there was ethical resistance to the
idea. I rejected such pretty concerns and chose to clone myself! After countless failed experiments, I finally realized my ambition. I then used my own clones to further my research! Do you know what it is like
to watch yourself die? ...It is FASCINATING! These clones were used to grow organs that could be transplanted into me. But then something went wrong... The clones began to...feel. They resented being used in such a way...and they fought back. After a brief, fierce war, only one cloned survived... AND I AM THAT SURVIVOR!

72 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:22:45am

re: #70 Fozzie Bear

When you see what? This isn't a secret. It was explicitly stated that this doesn't cap liability.

Take a deep breath, go back and read the thread.

73 cliffster  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:23:34am

re: #67 cliffster

On the other hand, every single other Republican immediately denounced the statement. Kinda hard to get worked up about that.

74 prairiefire  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:26:15am

re: #73 cliffster

Not every single other Republican has denounced it. Erick Son of Erick's blog is calling for Boehner's and Cantor's resignation for being mean to Barton.
Fratricide!

75 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:26:43am

re: #73 cliffster

On the other hand, every single other Republican immediately denounced the statement. Kinda hard to get worked up about that.

This reminds us again that there is the Republican party and there is the deranged Wingnutopshere. They overlap in a lot of places, but are still not identical.

76 Donna Ballard  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:29:27am

re: #67 cliffster

Pretty interesting situation. European company, in the Gulf of Mexico, off the US coast. It's hard to say what is legally doable when it comes down to it. What if a judge orders BP to do X, Y, or Z to their equipment out there, and they say no? Obama is leveraging a giant PR concern for BP to get them to do something. I think that's a good idea considering the grey area we'd be in if we got lawyers involved instead.

I sincerely doubt that BP would refuse to comply with a court order, at least not if they want to keep their drilling license in tact.

77 cliffster  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:30:55am

re: #74 prairiefire

Not every single other Republican has denounced it. Erick Son of Erick's blog is calling for Boehner's and Cantor's resignation for being mean to Barton.
Fratricide!

Erick Son of Erick is an elected official?

78 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:38:33am

re: #76 Dragon_Lady

I sincerely doubt that BP would refuse to comply with a court order, at least not if they want to keep their drilling license in tact.

I guarantee you BP will figure out a way to weasel out of this. BP isn't one corporation, it is an international collection of several organizations. It can find very creative ways avoid liability. There has already been a great deal of chatter about this on the street. I believe it is already planning something and are currently weighing its options.

79 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:45:29am

re: #78 Baier

I guarantee you BP will figure out a way to weasel out of this. BP isn't one corporation, it is an international collection of several organizations. It can find very creative ways avoid liability. There has already been a great deal of chatter about this on the street. I believe it is already planning something and are currently weighing its options.


And when they do, there will be outcries that Obama let them get away with it...

80 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:47:48am

re: #77 cliffster

Erick Son of Erick is an elected official?

Nope, just a dumbass.

81 garhighway  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:54:58am

re: #22 FullRoller

I generally don't agree with the likes of Mark Levin, but he is correct in saying that this was a shakedown of the highest order. There are already numerous laws in place to make BP pay for any and all costs involved with this disaster. This was more of an attempt by "O" to make it look like he's truly doing something. Now he has a $20 billion slush fund to dole out how and when he sees fit to improve his image.

I respectfully disagree.

BP's play was pretty obvious: try to pay short money by offering people the choice of taking the short money or litigating for the next 10 years. The escrow fund takes that play away from them, which is the better outcome.

82 Baier  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:58:44am

re: #81 garhighway

I respectfully disagree.

BP's play was pretty obvious: try to pay short money by offering people the choice of taking the short money or litigating for the next 10 years. The escrow fund takes that play away from them, which is the better outcome.

Exactly, the escrow will not "cap" liability, but it will help limit it. CNBC believes that those that take these funds must also agree to release BP of all liability.

83 garhighway  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 11:00:53am

re: #82 Baier

Exactly, the escrow will not "cap" liability, but it will help limit it. CNBC believes that those that take these funds must also agree to release BP of all liability.

And that's fair. You trade money for a release. The difference with this fund is that it will be Feinberg that decides how much to offer, so the offer is much more likely to be fair and reasonable than if it was BP drafting the offer. Claimants will then have to decide whether they want to take the money (and sign the release) or go litigate for 10 years to see if they can do better. That's a fair choice and a fair system.

84 S'latch  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 11:39:07am

It almost sounds like O'Reilly is saying that he agrees it was a shakedown, but he does not care--BP deserves a good shakedown.

85 The Curmudgeon  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 12:04:45pm

re: #84 Lawrence Schmerel

It almost sounds like O'Reilly is saying that he agrees it was a shakedown, but he does not care--BP deserves a good shakedown.

That's typical of him. He's totally results-driven.

86 avanti  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 12:32:32pm

As predicted, the religious right speaks out on Obama's two fathers comment:

"Need someone to make a political statement using Father's Day? Obama is up to the task.

In his presidential proclamation for Father's Day President Obama praised fathers for the positive impact they make in the lives of their children. Then Obama did his best to redefine the nuclear family unit by praising two-father families.

Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by a father and mother, a single father, two fathers, a step father, a grandfather, or caring guardian.

Doesn't exactly fit the image of the post-partisan president Obama was supposed to be. What's next, politically-charged statements on July 4th?"

AFA.

87 joest73  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 2:41:23pm

I have no sympathy for BP. One thing we do know is that the government has prevented people from cleaning up the spill. Bush got blamed for the bureaucratic nightmare in Katrina and now Obama should get blamed for the government inaction in the gulf.

88 Muadib  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:17:48pm
89 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 9:49:19pm

re: #88 Muadib

All of us use the oil. Freedom or Tyranny?

From that link:

When Adolf Hitler was building up the Nazi movement in the 1920s, leading up to his taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics.

Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hitler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.

"Useful idiots" was the term supposedly coined by V.I. Lenin to describe similarly unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union.

Ah, he must be thinking of the Tea Party people.

90 Muadib  Mon, Jun 21, 2010 10:14:15pm

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2021-06-05 2:51 pm PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
YUNGBLUD (With WILLOW) - Memories (Official Music Video) YUNGBLUD (with WILLOW) - Memories (Official Music Video) Stream and download “Memories (with WILLOW)” : yungblud.lnk.to watch more official YUNGBLUD videos: yungblud.lnk.to SIGN UP to YUNGBLUD's Mailing List: yungblud.lnk.to subscribe to YUNGBLUD: yungblud.lnk.to connect with YUNGBLUD online:visit the official ...
Thanos
1 week, 3 days ago
Views: 843 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 3 •