White House hits BP CEO for yacht trip while Obama golfs
By Gregg Re - The Daily Caller
Published: Sunday, June 20th, 2010
Updated: Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010
President Obama takes a swing during one of the 38 games of
golf he has played, as of June, 15 2010, since his presidency began.
Even as his administration criticized BP CEO Tony Hayward
for taking time off during the Gulf Coast oil spill crisis,
President Obama spent some time golfing for several hours
Saturday afternoon at Andrews Air Force Base.
The night before that, the president attended a Washington Nationals baseball game and, according to pool reports, sang
“Take Me Out to the Ballgame” before leaving early.
Hayward, meanwhile, watched his 52-foot yacht off the coast
of England and enjoyed “some rare private time with his son,”
a BP spokesperson told The New York Times.
In an interview with ABC that aired today, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel wasn’t having any of it. The boating trip,
that is.
“I think we can all conclude that Tony Hayward is not going to have
a second career in PR consulting,” Emanuel said on “This Week.”
He went on to describe the yacht trip as “part of a long line of PR gaffes and mistakes” committed by BP, whose chairman recently spoke of the company’s concern for “the small people.”
Emanuel then took aim at the Republican party, saying it would be “dangerous” if the GOP gained power in Washington.
“They see the aggrieved party here as BP, not the fishermen,”
he said of Republicans.
But President Obama has been no stranger to criticism for his own handling of the oil spill, which has now persisted for over sixty days.
His schedule since the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig
has included other trips to the golf course, a night of fun with a
Beatles legend, and a picnic.
The president even enjoyed private time with rock star Bono on April 30, just ten days after the blast killed several workers on the rig.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/20/white-house-hits-bp-ceo-for-ya
cht-trip-while-obama-golfs/
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
Breathtaking Hypocrisy
from tony whitcomb
to info@barackobama.com
cc "Barnett, Robert" cromer@econ.berkeley.edu,
hhigginbottom@barackobama.com,rreich@berkeley.edu,
thomas@bluestatedigital.com,jjackson@rainbowpush.org,
ofaminnesota@dnc.org,stuart@implex.net,steve@implex.net,
woodwardb@washpost.com,NWC Staff whistle@whistleblowers.org
date Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:39 PM
subject Breathtaking Hypocrisy
mailed-by gmail.com
President Obama --
On Friday, June 11, 2010 I received an e-mail from you which was entitled, "Tony, will you stand with me?"
President Obama with all due respect, I personally found your e-mail to be a breathtaking display of public hypocrisy, especially after what you, your Administration and Microsoft, have now put me, my Investors in Expotera and the American People, through over these past two years of your Presidency and my answer to you Mr. President is, "No."
I will not stand with you because in the words of Buddha:
"There is no Fire like Passion, there is no Shark like Hatred, there is no Snare like Folly, there is no Torrent like Greed!"
President Obama, I will not stand with you because in the words of President Abraham Lincoln:
"Worse than traitors in arms are the men who pretend loyalty to the flag, and feast and fatten on the misfortunes of the Nation while patriotic blood is crimsoning and their countrymen are moldering the dust!"
President Obama, I will not stand with you because in the words of the Apostle Peter:
"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them – bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping" (2 Peter 2:1–3 NIV).
President Obama on August 19, 2008 during the Saddleback Forum, you responded to a question about America's greatest moral failure as follows:
"I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime has been that we still don't abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the lest of my brothers, you do for me."
“That basic principle applies to poverty. It applies to racism and sexism. It applied to, you know, not having – not thinking – about providing ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class.”
President Obama in the book of Matthew Jesus declared, "But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment." (Matthew 12:36). "For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." (Matthew 12:37).
President Obama I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime is, "We The People" keep electing politicians who have absolutely no morals, no ethics, no integrity, no humility, no principles, no consciences and no shame.
Expotera provides the ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class and as soon as the American People realize this, you and Bill Gates are going to go down in history as two, "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing" and may God, have mercy on each of your souls because, "For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."
Sincerely,
Tony E. Whitcomb
Founder/CEO Expotera
http://expotera-ceo.blogspot.com/2010/06/tony-will-you-stand-
with-me_11.html
to info@barackobama.com
cc "Barnett, Robert" cromer@econ.berkeley.edu,
hhigginbottom@barackobama.com,rreich@berkeley.edu,
thomas@bluestatedigital.com,jjackson@rainbowpush.org,
ofaminnesota@dnc.org,stuart@implex.net,steve@implex.net,
woodwardb@washpost.com,NWC Staff whistle@whistleblowers.org
date Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:39 PM
subject Breathtaking Hypocrisy
mailed-by gmail.com
President Obama --
On Friday, June 11, 2010 I received an e-mail from you which was entitled, "Tony, will you stand with me?"
President Obama with all due respect, I personally found your e-mail to be a breathtaking display of public hypocrisy, especially after what you, your Administration and Microsoft, have now put me, my Investors in Expotera and the American People, through over these past two years of your Presidency and my answer to you Mr. President is, "No."
I will not stand with you because in the words of Buddha:
"There is no Fire like Passion, there is no Shark like Hatred, there is no Snare like Folly, there is no Torrent like Greed!"
President Obama, I will not stand with you because in the words of President Abraham Lincoln:
"Worse than traitors in arms are the men who pretend loyalty to the flag, and feast and fatten on the misfortunes of the Nation while patriotic blood is crimsoning and their countrymen are moldering the dust!"
President Obama, I will not stand with you because in the words of the Apostle Peter:
"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them – bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping" (2 Peter 2:1–3 NIV).
President Obama on August 19, 2008 during the Saddleback Forum, you responded to a question about America's greatest moral failure as follows:
"I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime has been that we still don't abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you do for the lest of my brothers, you do for me."
“That basic principle applies to poverty. It applies to racism and sexism. It applied to, you know, not having – not thinking – about providing ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class.”
President Obama in the book of Matthew Jesus declared, "But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment." (Matthew 12:36). "For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." (Matthew 12:37).
President Obama I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime is, "We The People" keep electing politicians who have absolutely no morals, no ethics, no integrity, no humility, no principles, no consciences and no shame.
Expotera provides the ladders of opportunity for people to get into the middle class and as soon as the American People realize this, you and Bill Gates are going to go down in history as two, "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing" and may God, have mercy on each of your souls because, "For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."
Sincerely,
Tony E. Whitcomb
Founder/CEO Expotera
http://expotera-ceo.blogspot.com/2010/06/tony-will-you-stand-
with-me_11.html
Friday, June 18, 2010
Where are the Jobs?
Where are the Jobs?
No payoff from O's spending
Last Updated: 4:44 AM, June 8, 2010
Posted: 12:27 AM, June 8, 2010
by Rich Lowry
Who needs a debt commission when White House Chief of
Staff Rahm Emanuel is on the case?
He wants to allow federal agencies to redirect half of any unnecessary, unspent money in their budgets to other
initiatives and half to deficit reduction.
Currently, agencies must return all money they don't spend,
giving them an incentive to spend it all.
Let's say Congress goes along: The move would affect all of
about $25 billion a year, according to The Wall Street Journal.
In May alone, the deficit was $142 billion. In the first eight
months of the fiscal year, it was $941 billion.
This is like alleviating the deficit with spare change found in between the cushions of couches at the Office of Management
and Budget.
Not cutting it: While the president touts "investments" on visits
like this one to a solar-panel factory, his stimulus has left the
private sector flat.
"The president's goal has been to change Washington's focus from figuring out how to spend money to how to save money," Emanuel explained to the Journal, in a statement that suggests he has taken leave of the reality-based community.
Perhaps he has been too busy managing the hectic trade in White House job offers to notice the administration has added $2.4 trillion in debt in 500 days.
This boom in government spending was supposed to produce a boom in the private economy. So far, we're one boom short.
The May jobs report is a perfect distillation of Obamanomics, with its emphasis on short-term help to the economy -- the stimulus package, the cash-for-clunkers program, etc. -- that is as sustainable as a sugar high.
The headline jobs number of 431,000 looked good, but 411,000 were temporary census jobs. They will soon disappear, unless we want to employ Americans in the counting of one another in perpetuity.
The 41,000 new private-sector jobs were about 60,000 short of what it takes just to absorb the natural growth of the labor force.
The driving force in the private economy has been companies pulling back on the liquidation of their inventories, a natural effect that would've occurred even absent President Obama's various stimuli.
The reaction of the Democrats to the failure of all the stimulus
is to support yet more stimulus. The same people who hailed the
first stimulus package as historic now maintain it was too small,
and complain it has been offset by state and local budget cuts.
H.L. Mencken said Puritans fear that someone, somewhere may
be happy.
Contemporary Keynesians fear that someone, somewhere may
be balancing a budget. In thrall to the New Deal, they can't
give up on public jobs as a panacea.
Obama hagiographer Jonathan Alter writes in Newsweek that the president should marshal "an army of the unemployed" to pick up
tar balls on the Gulf Coast.
The House recently considered another $200 billion "jobs bill." No one can explain why if last year's $862 billion stimulus didn't work,
a significantly smaller stimulus will.
In reaction to deficit fears, Democratic leaders broke the bill into two pieces, of roughly $90 billion and $20 billion, and slimmed down the total cost, partly by not extending the spending quite as far into the future.
No wonder Democrats fear adding all the numbers up in an annual budget resolution. "It's difficult to pass budgets in election years," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer admitted, "because they reflect what the status is."
No budget? Problem solved.
This won't fool anyone. Robust job growth requires boldness and
risk-taking in the private sector. What we have now is boldness
and risk-taking in the public sector.
It is loading as much debt onto the balance sheet as possible,
and creating the predicate for more regulation, spending and
taxes. We have active government and hesitant entrepreneurs.
Late in the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt's treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, told Congress, "We are spending
more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work."
Democrats have made Morgenthau's plaint their governing ethic.
In so doing, they are demonstrating their political and intellectual bankruptcy even faster than they are bankrupting the country.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/where
_are_the_jobs_tqHxPf4cNsEI9xTe8cSHuI
No payoff from O's spending
Last Updated: 4:44 AM, June 8, 2010
Posted: 12:27 AM, June 8, 2010
by Rich Lowry
Who needs a debt commission when White House Chief of
Staff Rahm Emanuel is on the case?
He wants to allow federal agencies to redirect half of any unnecessary, unspent money in their budgets to other
initiatives and half to deficit reduction.
Currently, agencies must return all money they don't spend,
giving them an incentive to spend it all.
Let's say Congress goes along: The move would affect all of
about $25 billion a year, according to The Wall Street Journal.
In May alone, the deficit was $142 billion. In the first eight
months of the fiscal year, it was $941 billion.
This is like alleviating the deficit with spare change found in between the cushions of couches at the Office of Management
and Budget.
Not cutting it: While the president touts "investments" on visits
like this one to a solar-panel factory, his stimulus has left the
private sector flat.
"The president's goal has been to change Washington's focus from figuring out how to spend money to how to save money," Emanuel explained to the Journal, in a statement that suggests he has taken leave of the reality-based community.
Perhaps he has been too busy managing the hectic trade in White House job offers to notice the administration has added $2.4 trillion in debt in 500 days.
This boom in government spending was supposed to produce a boom in the private economy. So far, we're one boom short.
The May jobs report is a perfect distillation of Obamanomics, with its emphasis on short-term help to the economy -- the stimulus package, the cash-for-clunkers program, etc. -- that is as sustainable as a sugar high.
The headline jobs number of 431,000 looked good, but 411,000 were temporary census jobs. They will soon disappear, unless we want to employ Americans in the counting of one another in perpetuity.
The 41,000 new private-sector jobs were about 60,000 short of what it takes just to absorb the natural growth of the labor force.
The driving force in the private economy has been companies pulling back on the liquidation of their inventories, a natural effect that would've occurred even absent President Obama's various stimuli.
The reaction of the Democrats to the failure of all the stimulus
is to support yet more stimulus. The same people who hailed the
first stimulus package as historic now maintain it was too small,
and complain it has been offset by state and local budget cuts.
H.L. Mencken said Puritans fear that someone, somewhere may
be happy.
Contemporary Keynesians fear that someone, somewhere may
be balancing a budget. In thrall to the New Deal, they can't
give up on public jobs as a panacea.
Obama hagiographer Jonathan Alter writes in Newsweek that the president should marshal "an army of the unemployed" to pick up
tar balls on the Gulf Coast.
The House recently considered another $200 billion "jobs bill." No one can explain why if last year's $862 billion stimulus didn't work,
a significantly smaller stimulus will.
In reaction to deficit fears, Democratic leaders broke the bill into two pieces, of roughly $90 billion and $20 billion, and slimmed down the total cost, partly by not extending the spending quite as far into the future.
No wonder Democrats fear adding all the numbers up in an annual budget resolution. "It's difficult to pass budgets in election years," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer admitted, "because they reflect what the status is."
No budget? Problem solved.
This won't fool anyone. Robust job growth requires boldness and
risk-taking in the private sector. What we have now is boldness
and risk-taking in the public sector.
It is loading as much debt onto the balance sheet as possible,
and creating the predicate for more regulation, spending and
taxes. We have active government and hesitant entrepreneurs.
Late in the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt's treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, told Congress, "We are spending
more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work."
Democrats have made Morgenthau's plaint their governing ethic.
In so doing, they are demonstrating their political and intellectual bankruptcy even faster than they are bankrupting the country.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/where
_are_the_jobs_tqHxPf4cNsEI9xTe8cSHuI
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Protect Environmental Whistleblowers!
from National Whistleblowers Center lmw@whistleblowers.org
reply-to National Whistleblowers Center lmw@whistleblowers.org
to Tony Whitcomb
date Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:56 AM
subject Protect Environmental Whistleblowers!
mailed-by mailmanager.net
As oil continues to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, the headlines paint a picture of executive greed, scientific studies ignored, and government regulations disregarded.
We are reminded of the words of presidential candidate Obama, "Workers are the eyes and ears of enforcement."
As the Deepwater Horizon oil spill quickly becomes the biggest and worst environmental disaster in history, we are left asking, where were the whistleblowers?
On the day of this terrible disaster, and on the days that led up to it, not a single employee who worked on the Deepwater Horizon rig or any other offshore oil rig was entitled to meaningful whistleblower protection!
We know that a few brave employees raised their concerns and were silenced or ignored.
We also know that the key laws that govern offshore drilling: the Outer Continental Shelf Act, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, and the Endangered Species Act, contain no whistleblower protections whatsoever.
Critical studies have confirmed that encouraging employees to blow the whistle is essential preventing catastrophes before they happen.
Any successful reform effort must include protections for employees who dare to come forward and report the deplorable disregard for our environment and safety that has become the norm in the profit-obsessed offshore drilling industry.
The laws must be retroactive, to ensure that workers who have the courage to testify against BP, Halliburton and Transocean and the corrupt regulators at the Minerals Management Service are encouraged to speak out and are fully protected.
Congress must immediately enact broad, effective whistleblower protections that cover the entire offshore drilling industry and its regulators.
Take Action Now!
Tell your representatives in Congress to enact whistleblower legislation to protect the employees in the offshore drilling industry who witness the blatant disregard for environmental and safety regulations every day.
Protect Environmental Whistleblowers!
http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=com_content&
task=view&id=1103&Itemid=81
reply-to National Whistleblowers Center lmw@whistleblowers.org
to Tony Whitcomb
date Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:56 AM
subject Protect Environmental Whistleblowers!
mailed-by mailmanager.net
As oil continues to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, the headlines paint a picture of executive greed, scientific studies ignored, and government regulations disregarded.
We are reminded of the words of presidential candidate Obama, "Workers are the eyes and ears of enforcement."
As the Deepwater Horizon oil spill quickly becomes the biggest and worst environmental disaster in history, we are left asking, where were the whistleblowers?
On the day of this terrible disaster, and on the days that led up to it, not a single employee who worked on the Deepwater Horizon rig or any other offshore oil rig was entitled to meaningful whistleblower protection!
We know that a few brave employees raised their concerns and were silenced or ignored.
We also know that the key laws that govern offshore drilling: the Outer Continental Shelf Act, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, and the Endangered Species Act, contain no whistleblower protections whatsoever.
Critical studies have confirmed that encouraging employees to blow the whistle is essential preventing catastrophes before they happen.
Any successful reform effort must include protections for employees who dare to come forward and report the deplorable disregard for our environment and safety that has become the norm in the profit-obsessed offshore drilling industry.
The laws must be retroactive, to ensure that workers who have the courage to testify against BP, Halliburton and Transocean and the corrupt regulators at the Minerals Management Service are encouraged to speak out and are fully protected.
Congress must immediately enact broad, effective whistleblower protections that cover the entire offshore drilling industry and its regulators.
Take Action Now!
Tell your representatives in Congress to enact whistleblower legislation to protect the employees in the offshore drilling industry who witness the blatant disregard for environmental and safety regulations every day.
Protect Environmental Whistleblowers!
http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=com_content&
task=view&id=1103&Itemid=81
Monday, June 14, 2010
Obama biggest recipient of BP cash
Obama biggest recipient of BP cash
By ERIKA LOVLEY | 5/5/10 5:05 AM EDT
Updated: 5/5/10 5:37 PM EDT
While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they’ve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.
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.
On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying — including $15.9 million last year alone — as it has tried to influence energy policy.
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
An Obama spokesman rejected the notion that the president took big oil money.
“President Obama didn’t accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign,” spokesman Ben LaBolt said. “He raised $750 million from nearly four million Americans. And since he became president, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives.”
In Congress, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who last week cautioned that the incident should “not be used inappropriately” to halt Obama’s push for expansion of offshore drilling, has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of BP’s largesse. Her comments created some blowback, with critics complaining that she is too blasé about the impact of the disaster, even though she was among the first lawmakers to call for a federal investigation into the spill.
As the top congressional recipient in the last cycle and one of the top BP cash recipients of the past two decades, Landrieu banked almost $17,000 from the oil giant in 2008 alone and has lined her war chest with more than $28,000 in BP cash overall.
“Campaign contributions, from energy companies or from environmental groups, have absolutely no impact on Sen. Landrieu’s policy agenda or her response to this unprecedented disaster in the Gulf,” said Landrieu spokesman Aaron Saunders. “The senator is proud of the broad coalition she’s built since her first day in the Senate to address the energy and environmental challenges in Louisiana and in the nation. This disaster only makes the effort to promote and save Louisiana’s coast all that more important.”
Several BP executives have given directly to Landrieu’s campaign, including current and previous U.S. operation Presidents Lamar McKay and Robert Malone. Other donors include Margaret Hudson, BP’s America vice president, and Benjamin Cannon, federal affairs director for the U.S. branch. Donations ranged from $1,000 to $2,300 during the past campaign cycle.
Environmentalists complain that Landrieu has played down the impact of oil spills.
“I mean, just the gallons are so minuscule compared to the benefits of U.S. strength and security, the benefits of job creation and energy security,” Landrieu said at a hearing last month on offshore drilling. “So while there are risks associated with everything, I think you understand that they are quite, quite minimal.”
They own Mary Landrieu and the rest of the Louisiana delegation,” said Greenpeace Research Director Kert Davies. “They have more money, disposable income and a fleet of dispensable lobbyists to beat the band.”
Other politicians with ties to coastal states or states with BP refineries have also reaped benefits from the fourth largest company in the world.
The top congressional recipients of BP campaign cash include Republican Rep. Don Young of the oil-intensive Alaska delegation, who has received almost as much as Obama, raking in $73,300 during his congressional tenure. Also on the list is Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), whose state has a BP refinery in Toledo and who has raked in $41,400. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has received $44,899.
“Make no mistake: BP ranks among the most powerful corporate forces in U.S. politics,” said Dave Levinthal, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics. “It donates hundreds of thousands of dollars every election cycle through its employees and political action committee and is routinely a seven- or eight-figure federal lobbying powerhouse each year.”
In 2008 alone, BP gave $37,000 to members of the House Energy Committee and $106,501 to members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which deals with security issues facing the nation’s oil supply.
BP has also evolved in its corporate giving over the past decade, shifting more money to Democrats. In 2000, the company gave almost 39 percent more to Republicans than to Democrats. But by 2008, Democrats had nearly pulled even with Republicans on BP donations.
Moreover, the company has nearly tripled the amount of money it has spent on lobbying, from about $5.7 million in 1999 to $15.9 million last year, according to lobbying disclosures.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html
By ERIKA LOVLEY | 5/5/10 5:05 AM EDT
Updated: 5/5/10 5:37 PM EDT
While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they’ve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.
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.
On top of that, the oil giant has spent millions each year on lobbying — including $15.9 million last year alone — as it has tried to influence energy policy.
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
An Obama spokesman rejected the notion that the president took big oil money.
“President Obama didn’t accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign,” spokesman Ben LaBolt said. “He raised $750 million from nearly four million Americans. And since he became president, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives.”
In Congress, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who last week cautioned that the incident should “not be used inappropriately” to halt Obama’s push for expansion of offshore drilling, has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of BP’s largesse. Her comments created some blowback, with critics complaining that she is too blasé about the impact of the disaster, even though she was among the first lawmakers to call for a federal investigation into the spill.
As the top congressional recipient in the last cycle and one of the top BP cash recipients of the past two decades, Landrieu banked almost $17,000 from the oil giant in 2008 alone and has lined her war chest with more than $28,000 in BP cash overall.
“Campaign contributions, from energy companies or from environmental groups, have absolutely no impact on Sen. Landrieu’s policy agenda or her response to this unprecedented disaster in the Gulf,” said Landrieu spokesman Aaron Saunders. “The senator is proud of the broad coalition she’s built since her first day in the Senate to address the energy and environmental challenges in Louisiana and in the nation. This disaster only makes the effort to promote and save Louisiana’s coast all that more important.”
Several BP executives have given directly to Landrieu’s campaign, including current and previous U.S. operation Presidents Lamar McKay and Robert Malone. Other donors include Margaret Hudson, BP’s America vice president, and Benjamin Cannon, federal affairs director for the U.S. branch. Donations ranged from $1,000 to $2,300 during the past campaign cycle.
Environmentalists complain that Landrieu has played down the impact of oil spills.
“I mean, just the gallons are so minuscule compared to the benefits of U.S. strength and security, the benefits of job creation and energy security,” Landrieu said at a hearing last month on offshore drilling. “So while there are risks associated with everything, I think you understand that they are quite, quite minimal.”
They own Mary Landrieu and the rest of the Louisiana delegation,” said Greenpeace Research Director Kert Davies. “They have more money, disposable income and a fleet of dispensable lobbyists to beat the band.”
Other politicians with ties to coastal states or states with BP refineries have also reaped benefits from the fourth largest company in the world.
The top congressional recipients of BP campaign cash include Republican Rep. Don Young of the oil-intensive Alaska delegation, who has received almost as much as Obama, raking in $73,300 during his congressional tenure. Also on the list is Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio), whose state has a BP refinery in Toledo and who has raked in $41,400. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has received $44,899.
“Make no mistake: BP ranks among the most powerful corporate forces in U.S. politics,” said Dave Levinthal, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics. “It donates hundreds of thousands of dollars every election cycle through its employees and political action committee and is routinely a seven- or eight-figure federal lobbying powerhouse each year.”
In 2008 alone, BP gave $37,000 to members of the House Energy Committee and $106,501 to members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which deals with security issues facing the nation’s oil supply.
BP has also evolved in its corporate giving over the past decade, shifting more money to Democrats. In 2000, the company gave almost 39 percent more to Republicans than to Democrats. But by 2008, Democrats had nearly pulled even with Republicans on BP donations.
Moreover, the company has nearly tripled the amount of money it has spent on lobbying, from about $5.7 million in 1999 to $15.9 million last year, according to lobbying disclosures.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html
Friday, June 11, 2010
Tony, will you stand with me?
from Barack Obama
reply-to info@barackobama.com
to Tony Whitcomb
date Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:39 AM
subject Tony, will you stand with me?
mailed-by bounce.bluestatedigital.com
Tony --
The BP oil spill is the worst environmental disaster of its kind in our nation's history. My administration has deployed every tool at our disposal for the response efforts. Thousands are working around the clock, including some of the top scientists and engineers from around the world.
We are working to hold BP accountable for the damage to the lands and the livelihoods of the Gulf Coast, and we are taking strong precautions to make certain a spill like this never happens again.
But our work will not end with this crisis. That's one of the reasons why I invited lawmakers from both parties to join me at the White House to discuss what it will take to move forward on legislation to promote a new economy powered by green jobs, combat climate change, and end our dependence on foreign oil.
Today, we consume more than 20 percent of the world's oil, but have less than two percent of the world's oil reserves. Beyond the risks inherent in drilling four miles beneath the surface of the Earth, our dependence on oil means that we will continue to send billions of dollars of our hard-earned wealth to other countries every month -- including many in dangerous and unstable regions.
In other words, our continued dependence on fossil fuels will jeopardize our national security. It will smother our planet. And it will continue to put our economy and our environment at risk. We cannot delay any longer, and that is why I am asking for your help.
Please stand with me today in backing clean energy. Adding your name will help Organizing for America create a powerful, public display of support for making this change happen.
The time has come, once and for all, for this nation to fully embrace a new future. That means continuing our unprecedented effort to make everything -- from our homes and businesses to our cars and trucks -- more energy-efficient. It means rolling back billions of dollars of tax breaks to oil companies so we can prioritize investments in clean energy research and development.
But the only way the transition to clean energy will ultimately succeed is if the private sector is fully invested in this future -- if capital comes off the sidelines and the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs is unleashed. And we can do that by finally putting a price on carbon pollution.
Many businesses have already embraced this idea because it provides a level of certainty about the future. And by pouring resources into research and development, by building new markets, we will reinvent our economy -- creating opportunities for entrepreneurship, for new companies and new jobs all across the country.
There will be transition costs and a time of adjustment. But if we refuse to take into account the full costs of our fossil fuel addiction -- and if we refuse to heed the warnings from the disaster in the Gulf -- we will have missed our best chance to seize the clean-energy future we know America needs to thrive in the years and decades to come.
The House of Representatives has already passed a comprehensive energy and climate bill, and there is currently a plan in the Senate -- a plan that was developed with ideas from Democrats and Republicans -- that would achieve the same goal. This week, I met with congressional leaders to determine a path forward. But this is an issue that Washington has long ignored in favor of protecting the status quo.
So I'm asking for your help today to show that the American people are ready for a clean-energy future.
Please add your name to mine:
http://my.barackobama.com/CleanEnergy
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
reply-to info@barackobama.com
to Tony Whitcomb
date Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:39 AM
subject Tony, will you stand with me?
mailed-by bounce.bluestatedigital.com
Tony --
The BP oil spill is the worst environmental disaster of its kind in our nation's history. My administration has deployed every tool at our disposal for the response efforts. Thousands are working around the clock, including some of the top scientists and engineers from around the world.
We are working to hold BP accountable for the damage to the lands and the livelihoods of the Gulf Coast, and we are taking strong precautions to make certain a spill like this never happens again.
But our work will not end with this crisis. That's one of the reasons why I invited lawmakers from both parties to join me at the White House to discuss what it will take to move forward on legislation to promote a new economy powered by green jobs, combat climate change, and end our dependence on foreign oil.
Today, we consume more than 20 percent of the world's oil, but have less than two percent of the world's oil reserves. Beyond the risks inherent in drilling four miles beneath the surface of the Earth, our dependence on oil means that we will continue to send billions of dollars of our hard-earned wealth to other countries every month -- including many in dangerous and unstable regions.
In other words, our continued dependence on fossil fuels will jeopardize our national security. It will smother our planet. And it will continue to put our economy and our environment at risk. We cannot delay any longer, and that is why I am asking for your help.
Please stand with me today in backing clean energy. Adding your name will help Organizing for America create a powerful, public display of support for making this change happen.
The time has come, once and for all, for this nation to fully embrace a new future. That means continuing our unprecedented effort to make everything -- from our homes and businesses to our cars and trucks -- more energy-efficient. It means rolling back billions of dollars of tax breaks to oil companies so we can prioritize investments in clean energy research and development.
But the only way the transition to clean energy will ultimately succeed is if the private sector is fully invested in this future -- if capital comes off the sidelines and the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs is unleashed. And we can do that by finally putting a price on carbon pollution.
Many businesses have already embraced this idea because it provides a level of certainty about the future. And by pouring resources into research and development, by building new markets, we will reinvent our economy -- creating opportunities for entrepreneurship, for new companies and new jobs all across the country.
There will be transition costs and a time of adjustment. But if we refuse to take into account the full costs of our fossil fuel addiction -- and if we refuse to heed the warnings from the disaster in the Gulf -- we will have missed our best chance to seize the clean-energy future we know America needs to thrive in the years and decades to come.
The House of Representatives has already passed a comprehensive energy and climate bill, and there is currently a plan in the Senate -- a plan that was developed with ideas from Democrats and Republicans -- that would achieve the same goal. This week, I met with congressional leaders to determine a path forward. But this is an issue that Washington has long ignored in favor of protecting the status quo.
So I'm asking for your help today to show that the American people are ready for a clean-energy future.
Please add your name to mine:
http://my.barackobama.com/CleanEnergy
Thank you,
President Barack Obama
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
An Inconvenient Truth
from James Hufferd
to Tony Whitcomb
date Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:12 AM
subject Re: An American's Creed
mailed-by aol.com
Mr. Whitcomb,
It looks to me like you had a wonderful idea to start a matrix company that associates desiring small businesses with online components, or with the totality online, can join to provide a shared but separate online presence to benefit mutually from offered features beyond their individual capacities.
It seems to me that such an practical association can work and be viable.
It's also interesting, but I don't find it particularly surprising, that some associates, or members, could become pirates and attempt to co-opt the organization.
Also, your example of Republicans trying to take over the operations
of the federal government from a minority position seems apropos.
Remember how Newt Gingrich tried to take over by shutting down
the government?
Attempted thievery is rampant among those without the imagination to create anything.
Look how the big Wall Street stock options firms spin other people's and firm's actual contributions into huge, completely non-essential dividends for themselves!
And, what actual value do health insurance companies add to health care delivery for consumers? Answer: none! They just take!
I hope the law adequately protects you from these parasites you have attracted -- if so, I suppose you can feel complimented that they find your creation attractive enough to want to take it over!
I wish you well, and may your endeavor be well-rewarded!!
James Hufferd, Ph.D.
Researcher and Author
to Tony Whitcomb
date Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:12 AM
subject Re: An American's Creed
mailed-by aol.com
Mr. Whitcomb,
It looks to me like you had a wonderful idea to start a matrix company that associates desiring small businesses with online components, or with the totality online, can join to provide a shared but separate online presence to benefit mutually from offered features beyond their individual capacities.
It seems to me that such an practical association can work and be viable.
It's also interesting, but I don't find it particularly surprising, that some associates, or members, could become pirates and attempt to co-opt the organization.
Also, your example of Republicans trying to take over the operations
of the federal government from a minority position seems apropos.
Remember how Newt Gingrich tried to take over by shutting down
the government?
Attempted thievery is rampant among those without the imagination to create anything.
Look how the big Wall Street stock options firms spin other people's and firm's actual contributions into huge, completely non-essential dividends for themselves!
And, what actual value do health insurance companies add to health care delivery for consumers? Answer: none! They just take!
I hope the law adequately protects you from these parasites you have attracted -- if so, I suppose you can feel complimented that they find your creation attractive enough to want to take it over!
I wish you well, and may your endeavor be well-rewarded!!
James Hufferd, Ph.D.
Researcher and Author
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
