I love how these stupid assed talking points are recycled. didn't we have this dicussion when it happened, jeesh
negotiate?!?!? Obama to Americans: "BP will pay every dime owed". That is not a negotiation, that is an order. BP agreed cause they had no desire to pick a fight with the president with what they currently had going on.
Your finding something wrong where there isn't. They would either pay after they lost in courts or after they came to an agreement. Either way Obama wasn't out of line in saying that, and BP did pay, and chose not to go court first.
LOL, this is a classic case of what Matt Taibbi wrote about the tea party. Tallanvor, are you rolling around on a scooter in Kentucky?
So, you would have a problem if a landlord insisted that a tenant pay rent for every day they occupied a dwelling? You would have an issue if the plumber billed the restaurant the sum of his parts and labor? If your kid spilled sugar on the kitchen floor, it'd be OK with you if he only swept up part of it? You're ridiculous.
From what you wrote it shows that BP had a choice in the matter. They weren't legally forced into this.
No they weren't legally forced. Pressure was applied by the president which was inappropriate in this instance. Thus the term "shake down". BP had a choice in the same way a person being blackmailed has a choice.
It is neither, it is a statement of fact from the President to We, the People. One way or another, it was a promise that could be kept, whether he negotiated a settlement with BP or it went through the courts. Obama did not order BP to do anything, he sat down with the company and negotiated a settlement that would provide immediate help to the people that BP harmed in a manner to which BP was amenable. They also agreed to avoid the certain PR disaster of thousands of lawsuits, BP got benefits from the deal and Louisianans got benefits from the deal. That is the nature of a compromise, you are just pissed off that Obama actually did something good for We, the People.
No, he was not making sure BP fulfilled its obligations under law. Under law, BP would have only been liable for $75 million in damages from claims. (this does not include the clean up, which they are completely liable for). The President, in affect, negotiated a contract that BP would put $20 billion in escrow to pay for claims against the company. BP felt obliged to do so because they are trying to protect their interests in North America where they employ hundreds of thousands of people and invest and make tens of Billions of dollars. The only way it is legal is that it is legal under contract law. Obama could not force the $20 billion out of BP. BP thought the best way to stay in business in the US was to bend over backwards to pay out. BP actually has a history of trying to give in to politicians in order to do business. Their investments into alternatives, their support of cap and trade, etc has all been to buy political capital with the traditionally anti-energy politicians. (it did no good during the spill) Both parties actually win. The government gets to make it look like it did something by basically legalizing through a contract something that BP had already stated they would do (and were doing). BP wins in that it gets to basically hand off the issue of paying claims to a third party to where they can't be the bad guy. Until Ken Feinberg took over, BP had actually not denied a single claim (there was no way they could in the media/political environment they were in, it would have been front page on CNN the first time BP denied claims). Ken Feinberg, while writing checks left and right, has actually had the will to deny the ones that need to be denied. One can wonder what would have happened if Exxon/Mobile or Chevron had happened to be the operator on this spill. Many in the industry guess they would have written a $75 million check and said see you in court for the rest.
BP could have gone through multiple law suits or bargain with the President. They had a choice the way any company responsible for a major environmental disaster has a choice. They chose the way they wanted to handle it. The President like any president who is concerned about the environment and a company that was responsible did a fair job of getting involved.
I think you are misunderstanding the term "shake down". Pressure was applied but BP certainly could've fought this legally. "Shake down" would mean some sort of illegal force to compel BP to do so (for example you pay me or I break your arm) but you have yet to prove there was any illegality involved. You are mistaking applying political pressure based on your own standard of what is inappropriate. The Presidency is a political office and as such in such dealings political pressure is completely appropriate.
It could but in this context you watering the term down to be almost meaningless. For example if I tell my neighbor he needs to pay me for the cost of my mailbox that he accidently ran over or else I will tell the rest of the block he is a bad neighbor under you definition that would be a shake down.
Clearly you have never negotiated before. Because if you had, you'd know what coercion is (or what you awkwardly are trying to say an "order" is). Negotiation is all about implicit consequences versus direct threats. You have to cleverly staking out a position far beyond what you really wanted. Do you ever give your best offer up front? No. You have to make the other side think it's getting a deal when it's just giving you want you want. Your quote is an example of smart negoiation, not coercion. How do I kno it's not even coercive you ask? Because I know the difference....this would be coercive: "BP will pay every dime it has or else not be ever allowed to drill in U.S. waters and face assets being frozen". Obama didn't order or coerce. BP paid because frankly, it was in it's interest to pay versus face endless years of litigation and bad publicity. In fact you should be making is that Obama let BP off the hook way too easily because BP jumped at making a $20 billion deal. I am sure they would have feared a lot worse. If it were me, I'd wait for BP to fix the spill, and then confiscate all it's assets whereever I could domestically and foreign. 100's of billions of dollars frozen. Then I'd invite them to the negoiating table and ask them how much they'd like to give to the state of florida. I would have gotten a lot lot more than 20 billion let me tell you. And oh yeah - that would have been coercion - get it now?
Do you mind if I ask you a question. Do you think the government should've done anything to hold BP accountable?
