Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Indisputable Evidence: BP Has Obama In Their Back Pocket!!!!!

page: 5
67
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 26 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
I have studied this in a Masters Degree of IR at the highest level - ok - so this type of finger pointing with baseless accusations where there is ample evidence to refute the claims [*SNIP*]

The campaign contributions must be declared - no employee can be forced to make contributions nor can they be deducted and redirected.

The OBAMA CRAP being touted here is simply ludicrous - smear and bipartisan muck racking - everything that the new rules are meant to over rule.

The facts stand without any reinterpretation......ok.

I am happy to debate with anyone the ridiculous situation in America politics through corruption via campaign contributions - I am very well versed in this affair and have studied it for almost a decade - however there is no point in attempting to smear people with ridiculous claims which are not true when there are so many glaring and obvious examples of blatant corruption.

For those who do not know the lobbyists as they are known are called the K-STREET GANG - anyone heard of that - if you haven't you probably shouldn't even be commenting on corruption through corporate sponsorship.....ok.

Cheers.

 


Mod Edit: Removed off topic comments.

[edit on 5/26/2010 by AshleyD]




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by audas
 


Obviously you have knowledge to contribute.

Perhaps it is in your delivery. Instead of poo-pooing on this thread, maybe you could have steered it where you thought it should go. You know, maybe provide some other examples


Anyway, just look at how our President is handling this. Doesn't it speak of corporate control?

You are dreaming if you think companies don't encourage one candidate over another...don't tell me it's illegal, I know that. It's happened to me.

I swear, no masters degree on the planet has taught anyone any common sense.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:06 PM
link   
If the government was really serious about protecting the people, it wouldn't matter how much money they received from corporations, etc. The sad part about this disaster is that the oil leaks could have been easily stopped on day 2 or 3 by conventional high explosives. This is a common way to stop underwater oil leaks. Where was the president when the slick hit the sand? How far does it have to travel before they get serious about solving the problem? Our beautiful Gulf is now a cesspool. Those of us who live on it are very upset!



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by audas
 


Oh my goodness, I hope that wasnt your best invitation to a conversation,
I kept seeing Sam Kinison standing in front of me while I was reading that.
Soooooo how about you type out some clarification on the subject, the more the better.
And please, I'm not so young anymore, I startle easily, dont yell.
Thank you.



posted on May, 26 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   
To the original poster...

...ahem....

DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Campaign contributions ae Unconstitutional if you look at it from the standpoint of Only Registered American Voters get to vote for the President.. But.. Foreign Corporations can 'vote' by giving the guy millions of dollars in contributions !?

That makes no sense.

Only American people and companies should get to help fund a candidates campaign because they are who the new President will be for. He's Not King of England, He's Not PB's president.

What a freaking Sham ! This should be Illegal !!!

How you gonna debate the logic in That audas ?

[edit on 27-5-2010 by JohnPhoenix]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


Just because a company tries to influence Washington by giving money to the Obama administration and lobbying, doesn't mean they have anyone in their pocket. Many companies try to influence legislation in this way.

Some people (including Obama) may be swayed by such a thing but that doesn't mean it's so. The fact that you put "Indisputable Evidence" in your title is ridiculous.

The way you've come to this conclusion is very "knee jerk" and thoughtless. You may want to consider this more of a possibility and stop touting it as fact.

It's the choice between ignorance and honesty.

It's people like you who make me want to run from this website and never come back.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 06:36 AM
link   
reply to post by brianmg5
 


How do you know what kind of person I am?

Typical deflection. When all else fails...

Attack the character of the OP!! Works everytime



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Final notice.

Please get on topic and stop the tit for tat. Feel free to discuss and debate the topic but do so in a civil and non disruptive manner.

Thank you.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Obama scares te hell out of me. A least with Bush we knew what to expect. This guy has a whole new set of tricks coming out of his hat.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
The following is a quote from www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64420A20100505

"BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company's political action committees - $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals."

This seems like indesputable evidence to me.

It also looks like Mary Landrieu received some serious cash from BP executives.

I think that they should return the cash.

Fat chance.

Also...... Corporate officers are considered as employees !

[edit on 27-5-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Why don't the recipients of BP campaign contributions come forward and return the money to avoid the impression of impropriety?


Rhetorical Question.

[edit on 27-5-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MY2Commoncentsworth
 
I hope someone can accept Reuters.

I starred your post(s), twice, since it was a double.

ETA: To answer the rhetorical question in your edit, They don't care what we think!

[edit on 27-5-2010 by butcherguy]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Thanks for the stars butcherguy. The BP oil spill is going to sink the
economy down here. Any help to get the word out to force the government to act is greatly appreciated.

The campaign contributions that the administration received just go to show why they haven't done enough to stop this leak.

Can you imagine the fits that the media would be having if Bush was still president?



[edit on 27-5-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 

Just because BP gave Obama more money than it gave any politician in the last 20 years, that doesn't mean they have Obama in their back pocket.

Just because Goldman Sachs gave Obama more money than it gave any politician in the last 20 years, that doesn't mean they have Obama in their back pocket.

Remember, the Republicans are the party of big business. But didn't the T.E.A. Parties start to protest the bail outs of big business? So, the T.E.A. Parties must be mostly Democrats.
[end sarcasm]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by CharlesMartel
 


Step away from the parties for a minute. They are all the same. The left-right paradigm keeps us in shackles. Politicians are always in somebody's back pocket!



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   


More evidence-


Now, we learn the details of a connection of Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago mayoral wannabe, current Obama chief of staff, ex-representative, ex-Clinton money man and ex-Windy City political machine go-fer.

Shortly after Obama's happy inaugural, eyebrows rose slightly upon word that, as a House member, Emanuel had lived the last five years rent-free in a D.C. apartment of Democratic colleague Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and her
husband, Stanley Greenberg.



Now follow these standard Washington links if you can:

Greenberg's consulting firm was a prime architect of BP's recent rebranding drive as a green petroleum company, down to green signs and the slogan "Beyond Petroleum." Greenberg's company is also closely tied to a sister Democratic outfit -- GCS, named for the last initials of Greenberg, James Carville, another Clinton advisor, and Bob Shrum, John Kerry's 2004 campaign manager. According to published reports, GCS received hundreds of thousands of dollars in political polling contracts in recent years from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Probably just a crazy coincidence. But you'll never guess who was the chairman of that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dispensing those huge polling contracts to his kindly rent-free landlord.


Rahm was most certainly in their back pocket too!!!









 
67
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join