Shame on you Obama!!!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:55 am

This two-faced git looks as though he's sticking the boot in to cover his own arse in the run-up to the mid-term elections in America:

BP oil spill: shares plummet as US warns it will 'take action' to stop dividend - Telegraph

Moved to chit-chat as it soesn't seem to work in International Politics.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:18 am

Yeah Bill, a lot of us don't like him either. If we can survive his destructive ways until 2012, he's outa here.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:00 am

hoppy;1315036 wrote: Yeah Bill, a lot of us don't like him either. If we can survive his destructive ways until 2012, he's outa here.

Good luck with that. If Obama has his way by 2012 we will have destroyed christian America leaving behind only a faint memory of what once was in a smouldering pile of greedy corporate ash and replaced it with negroes and jews and homosexuals (muslim homosexuals) lesbian nuns will distribute a fair share of the pie to every man woman and child extracting the wealth from the haves and putting the have nots on the map.

Obamas true identy will be revealed and the world as you now know it will cease to exist.

Borders will become a thing of the past and Mexicans will be running nilly willy around your town like its nobodies business.

You wont know what hit you. :sneaky:

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:51 am

Since BP is an international company, I am not sure how the US can prevent the dividend from being paid to shareholders, except to those who are in the US.

That would make a lot of sense.

NOT.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:42 am

I'm getting confused now. We're the bad guys because we are raising a stink over the gulf but have been ignorant with regards to Nigeria.. apparently we are all about the money.

but..

We're the bad guys because we are more concerned over the oil spill in the gulf then we are about folks pensions?

I wish the world could make up its mind.:rolleyes:

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:27 am

LarsMac;1315061 wrote: =I am not sure how the US can prevent the dividend from being paid to shareholders, except to those who are in the US.

It's odd. 40% of BP is American-owned, perhaps he can prevent those people from taking their dividend?

Also, *this*:

"Ken Salazar, the US interior secretary, said yesterday that the Obama administration would require BP to pay the salaries of any workers who were laid off as a result of the governmentâ€™s moratorium on offshore drilling, imposed while safety reviews take place"

I don't understand that at all. It's just plain wrongness.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 2:43 pm

Not only do americans own around 40% in total, of the that total 25% of it is owned by american pension funds. There are more americans working for it than there are british. It hasn' british since thatcher sold it off along with the rest of the family silver back in the eighties.

What can Obama do - nationalise it like he did the banks? Making it bankrupt isn't terribly constructive either. On the other hardly this is hardly his fault but another legacy of right wing administrations in the past - they always leave piles of **** behind them and pretend it wasn't them. It's being portrayed over here as anti british rhetoric.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 4:53 am

Obama's not as terribly bright as portrayed. We don't want him trying to bankrupt BP either. If he does, American taxpayers will have to pay.

Royd Fissure · Post by **Royd Fissure** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:58 am

A multinational company polluting someone's waters and coastal lands isn't a multinational issue. It's a local issue. In this case it's an American issue and the US govt is rightly upset about it. Any problems caused to British people are as a result of BP's actions, not the US govt's actions. The US government is rightly concerned with the pollution and damage to the environment and the local economy and they're doing something about it. I think Obama has handled this well.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:29 am

List of things we can credit to Barak Obama, based on the same criteria as used to give him credit for BP PROMISING to compensate those effected;

1. Obama was the first man to walk on the moon

2. He invented the polio vaccine

3. He crossed the Atlantic with nothing more than an inner tube

4. He invented Al Gore

5. Taught Jed Clampett how to shoot

6. Lead engineer on the famed Essex Tri-Directional tractor

7. Obama cleaned up Illinois politics

8. Won game 7 of the 1927 World Series when he struck out Babe Ruth on 2 pitches

9. Invented fire

10. Has ALL of our best interest's at heart

Royd Fissure · Post by **Royd Fissure** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:35 pm

That was very imaginative hoppy - and humorous, a bit of a giggle when making a point is always welcome

Obama has got BP to make a promise. If you consider that BP had an option of telling everyone to get stuffed then surely you have to grant Obama some credit for getting BP to the position of making a promise. Until that promise is either broken or fulfilled I don't see any reasonably objective grounds for continued criticism of Obama.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:25 pm

Royd Fissure;1316690 wrote: If you consider that BP had an option of telling everyone to get stuffed

That is something forgotten by many. It's good for "O", and ought to be good for BP, considering hos some firms have in the past abrogated their responsibilities.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:15 pm

Hug Obama all you want, I'm gonna party 'til I puke the day he's outa office.:yh_sick

Royd Fissure · Post by **Royd Fissure** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:55 am

hoppy;1316764 wrote: Hug Obama all you want, I'm gonna party 'til I puke the day he's outa office.:yh_sick

Apparently being slightly left of centre in terms of politics I am supposed to be cursing Obama for perpetuating the work of the Bush administration (apparently nationality is irrelevant, global citizens and all that). Somehow I don't see it, but I could be very wrong. I get this feeling that any president has to be somewhat pragmatic.