America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 13 years ago by gringococolo. 33 replies replies.
the congress is investigating BP to find out why the gulf of mexico
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
and many of our costal states are all bought decimated and may never recover.

can any of you conservatives or republicans explain why the republicans in the congress are preventing the committeethat is investigating, from having subpoena power.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
The Republicans don't hold a majority in either house.

The Dems can run (and HAVE) ripshod on America with whatever they want from bailouts to healthcare for all.

Here's a clue though...instead of "investigating" that...why not introduce legislation that repeals NAFTA?
HockeyDad Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
Even better, squeeze all oil companies for larger campaign contributions. A penny or two a gallon will never be noticed.
snowwolf777 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-03-2000
Posts: 4,082
And again ....

You have Congress

You have the White House

You have the leadership posts on all major committees

How can any minority in any chamber "prevent" anything except through filabuster, or a straight-up vote where some folks from your side walk over to our side?

I understand whining is a primary job description for any Dem/Liberal. But to constantly point at the minority party and still say "It's all their fault?" That's the best you can do?

RollEyes

And now that we're past that, do you think another Congress pre-election show trial is going to get something done? Really?

Kind of like every time the price of gas went up 10 cents Al Gore had another show trial on gasoline prices. And nothing happened. And everyone forgot about it after a week. But it made it look like the Democrats really cared and were takin' care of business for the "little man". And I suppose for a large part of their voting block, appearances were/are good enough.

Stinkdyr Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,948
hey, here's an idea that is SURE to win us some votes in November......



let's get some medium funny comedian to testify b4 congress in support of our socialist agenda for Amexica.


that'll work!


Dancing
DrMaddVibe Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
Democrats to stuff 20 bills into post-election lame-duck session
By Alexander Bolton - 09/28/10 06:00 AM ET

Democrats are considering cramming as many as 20 pieces of legislation into the lame-duck session they plan to hold after the Nov. 2 election.

The array of bills competing for floor time shows the sense of urgency among Democratic lawmakers to act before the start of the 112th Congress, when Republicans are expected to control more seats in the Senate and House.


But, given the slow pace of the Senate, it also all but guarantees that Democrats will be hard-pressed to pass even a small part of their lame-duck agenda.

The highest-profile item for November and December is the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, passed under President George W. Bush, which expire at year’s end.

Democrats have promised they will not allow tax rates to rise for families making less than $250,000 a year.

Democratic leaders have also prioritized the defense authorization bill, which includes a repeal of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that bans gays from serving openly in the military.

Democrats and gay-rights activists fear repeal could prove impossible if Republicans control the House or additional Senate seats.

Sen. ****** Durbin (Ill.), the chamber’s second-ranking Democrat, has promised to push for a vote on the DREAM Act, which would give the children of illegal immigrants a chance to earn legal residence.

That bill would have much less chance of passing if Republicans controlled the House.

Democratic leaders also view an extension of unemployment insurance benefits and a freeze in scheduled cuts to doctors’ Medicare reimbursements as must-pass legislation.

Lawmakers could spend much of the lame-duck session haggling over these two expensive proposals, which sucked up weeks of time in the Senate earlier this year.

Thousands of laid-off workers will begin to lose unemployment benefits after Nov. 30, and doctors are scheduled to see a 23 percent cut in Medicare reimbursements on Dec. 1.

Conservative Blue Dog Democrats in the House may demand the cost of the so-called doc fix to be offset with spending cuts.

The limited amount of time in a lame-duck session has only heightened competition among Democrats pushing different pet priorities.

Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) wants the Senate to consider a package of tax-relief extensions he has been working on all year.

“The fully paid-for bill Sen. Baucus introduced this month cuts taxes for families paying college tuition and state and local sales taxes, for teachers who purchase supplies for their classroom and for many employers, which frees up cash and creates jobs,” said a Finance Committee aide. “These tax cuts will create jobs and provide the support our economy needs, and they should be passed this year.”

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, is intent on passing a renewable electricity standard.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, says his cybersecurity bill should also come up for a vote, while Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, has called for ratification of the New START arms-control treaty with Russia.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) says he intends to hold Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to a promise to schedule a vote on legislation that would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from taking action to curb carbon gas emissions for two years.


Rockefeller, chairman of the Commerce Committee, has also pushed for the Senate to complete mine-safety legislation.

“Sen. Rockefeller feels very strongly that both his mine and workplace safety bill and EPA suspension bill need to be brought before the full Senate,” said an aide to Rockefeller. “He will continue to work to see the passage of both as quickly as possible and is committed to moving them forward. He continues to evaluate acceptable vehicles to do so.”

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), the vice chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference, told reporters Friday that leaders would also bring up a bill to address Chinese currency manipulation.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, hopes Congress will pass food-safety legislation Reid tried to bring to the floor last week. Democratic leaders pulled the bill even though they could have had enough votes to stop a Republican filibuster.

Durbin, who has made food safety a high priority, later told reporters that it could have taken nearly a week to jump through the procedural hoops necessary to pass the bill.

House leaders have some of their own priorities.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters last week that she hopes to take up child nutrition legislation, a favorite item of liberals that may set less generous levels of assistance if passed by a GOP-controlled House. (The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent in August.)

Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the Education and Labor Committee and one of Pelosi’s lieutenants, wants Congress to act on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization.

Bills that have been painstakingly negotiated may have to be overhauled if Republicans control the House next year or pick up half a dozen Senate seats.

Deals that were made to satisfy retiring senators will become moot, and an incoming class of as many as 19 freshman senators could raise fresh objections.

All pending bills die at the end of a Congress and must be reintroduced at the start of a new two-year term.

This means lawmakers will have to repeat the laborious process of holding committee hearings, markups and rounds of private negotiations before legislation is brought to the floor again in 2011 or 2012.

If Congress returns to Washington the week after the election and works right up until Christmas, it would have six weeks to pass legislation — assuming a week off for Thanksgiving, as is tradition.Julian Pecquet contributed to this article.


Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/121223-dems-stuff-lame-duck
fishinguitarman Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
SHOULD read....


Source:
http://OVERthehill.com/homenews/senate
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
so far i have not had anyone answer the question.

can any of you conservatives or republicans explain why the republicans in the congress are preventing the committeethat is investigating, from having subpoena power
fishinguitarman Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
DrMaddVibe wrote:
The Republicans don't hold a majority in either house.

The Dems can run (and HAVE) ripshod on America with whatever they want from bailouts to healthcare for all.

Here's a clue though...instead of "investigating" that...why not introduce legislation that repeals NAFTA?






first line
jackconrad Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
It's a Damned shame that Other countries are the only ones who are comming in and drilling anymore because we have regulated our own people out of the business. Other nations are not going to follow these dumb assed rules and are only humoring us at this point by acting like they give a damn.
daveincincy Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2006
Posts: 20,033
RICKAMAVEN wrote:
so far i have not had anyone answer the question.

can any of you conservatives or republicans explain why the republicans in the congress are preventing the committeethat is investigating, from having subpoena power


Um...I think your question was answered, but, as usual, you refuse to listen because you don't like the answer. Boo hoo!
ZRX1200 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Rick they cannot stop them....Now what good will come other than a dog and pony show for Dems to get camera time before an election and pitch their class warefare crutch they're leaning on this cycle.
DrafterX Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
RICKAMAVEN wrote:
and many of our costal states are all bought decimated and may never recover.

can any of you conservatives or republicans explain why the republicans in the congress are preventing the committeethat is investigating, from having subpoena power.




because the Clintons threatened to have them shot..?? Confused
donutboy2000 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 11-20-2001
Posts: 25,000
#1

Can you explain why Obama is stonewalling the investigation? That's right BP bought him off.


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.


politico
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
senator demint objected to the request for subpeona power and that is all it took to stop it.

Sen. Jim DeMint, of South Carolina, the new Republican kingpin and enforcer on Capitol Hill. DeMint told Bloomberg Businessweek last week that his goal for the next Senate is "complete gridlock." As far as DeMint is concerned, there's no place for bipartisan compromise or consensus or some "watered-down Republican philosophy," as he put it. For DeMint, this is war. The only acceptable outcome is total victory, and any Republican who dares to disagree will be treated as a traitor during the next election cycle.

ties off, jackets off. backward march
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
fishingguitarman #9

see above!
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
ZRX1200 #12

they have see #15.

now that you have een found wrong, what do you have to say
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
donutboy2000 #14

where did you learn that President Obama is stinewalling the investigation, or did you make that up out of whole cloth.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
donutboy

you did make it all up.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
Four lessons from BP oil spill
By: Darren Samuelsohn
September 29, 2010 04:34 AM EDT

Lessons abound from the BP oil, which that will go down as the nation’s worst environmental disaster.

The Oil Spill Commission, a bipartisan panel chartered by President Barack Obama, wrapped up hearings Tuesday as it works toward a January release of its assessment of the historic gusher. A National Academy of Sciences review is due in mid-2011.

But the political fallout isn’t waiting for detailed technical reports.

Now that the well is finally sealed, key lawmakers, administration officials and other experts in the energy and environmental field are weighing in with greater hindsight and perspective.

Here are four themes emerging from an analysis of the spill:

1. Legislation does not move immediately in response to a disaster.

Environmentalists held a news conference earlier this summer, using a live video feed of the underwater oil spill, to plead for action on global warming legislation in response to the spill, much as lawmakers had passed the Oil Pollution Reduction Act after the Exxon Valdez disaster, or Congress created the Department of Homeland Security after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Instead, the activists found themselves mired in Capitol Hill gridlock.

“People just weren’t talking about it,” White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner told POLITICO about the need to pass a climate bill in the wake of the oil spill. “The vast majority of people — it really surprised me — they moved on very quickly.”

The Senate has punted on climate legislation and is stuck over how to deal with the spill itself. The House this summer passed a bill removing the $75 million liability cap for companies responsible for an oil spill, as well as authorizing the overhaul of the now-defunct Minerals Management Service.

But additional action on the issue is not expected until next year.

“The problem with Congress is when there’s a disaster or incident, there’s a whole huge rush to have hearings,” said Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.). “And when it leaves the front page of the paper, there’s no more impetus to do that anymore.”

2. The political fallout has been limited to Obama.

Besides BP, Obama emerged as the spill’s biggest political punching bag during the summer.

Rush Limbaugh quickly labeled the disaster “Obama’s Katrina.” The National Republican Senatorial Committee released a two-minute-plus mash-up criticizing the president for playing golf while the spill continued into its fifth week. The viral video featured former Clinton political adviser James Carville ripping the White House for leaving his native region in the lurch.


Obama tried to stay on the case. The president’s first Oval Office address dealt with the spill. His aides issued blow-by-blow timelines explaining the administration’s response.

“The day that the rig collapsed and fell to the bottom of the ocean, I had my team in the Oval Office that first day,” Obama said at a May 27 news conference. “Those who think that we were either slow on our response or lacked urgency don’t know the facts. This has been our highest priority since this crisis occurred.”

In an interview with Rolling Stone published Tuesday, Obama defended both his administration’s response and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, whom critics have chided for not enacting reforms at MMS quickly enough.
“What Ken would admit, and I would admit, and what we both have to take responsibility for, is that we did not fully change the institutional conflicts that were inherent in that office,” Obama said. “If you ask why did we not get that done, the very simple answer is that this is a big government with a lot of people, and changing bureaucracies and agencies is a time-consuming process. We just didn’t get to it fast enough.”

But the damage has been done. An Associated Press poll in mid-June found that 45 percent approved of the president’s handling of the disaster, while 52 percent disapproved. A mid-August follow-up saw only a slight improvement for Obama, with 50 percent approving and 49 percent disapproving.

“It hurt Obama in Florida, I can tell you that,” said Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.). “It wasn’t until after, when everybody got it together, but my Lord, that was after how long? Three and a half months?”

3. Ken Feinberg isn’t a miracle worker.

Obama’s point man for administering damage claims in the Gulf is under fire for the speed with which he’s doing his work.

Ken Feinberg — best known for his work on the Sept. 11 victims-compensation fund — had said individual claims would be answered within 48 hours and business claims wrapped up in seven days. But tens of thousands of claims remain pending for time periods much longer than that.

Justice Department Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli earlier this month urged Feinberg to “devote additional resources or make whatever changes are necessary to speed up the process.”

Feinberg replied Saturday that he’s trying to move things along, with claims grouped by industry now that he has a better grip on the profits and losses for fishermen, shrimpers, tourism and businesses.


He also said that his Gulf Coast Claims Facility has paid out more than $400 million in five weeks and that it took BP four months to pay out about the same amount.

“We have heard, and we understand the criticisms, and we are responding,” Feinberg said. “We will be sending out more generous checks more quickly.”

Lawmakers say they’re willing to give Feinberg the benefit of the doubt. “You can’t grade his performance because he’s just getting started,” Nelson said.

4. Get the number right!

The federal government took a beating from the public and media for its handling of the spill, even as it deferred to BP on key issues involving equipment and expertise.

Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Bob Reilly, co-chairmen of the Oil Spill Commission, said there are several reasons for the lack of public confidence, starting with the poor information on the flow rate that trickled out shortly after the disaster. Officials initially said that only 1,000 barrels to 5,000 barrels a day were leaking from the well, but the flow rate was later appraised at 62,000 barrels.

That error left spill responders ill equipped to deal with everything from construction of the “top hat” dome to how much boom to deploy in the region.

“It’s a little bit like Custer,” Graham told reporters Monday. “He underestimated the number of Indians that’d be on the other side of the hill, and he paid the ultimate price for that.”

All told, the government estimates about 4.9 million barrels of oil spilled, with 804,877 barrels collected at the wellhead.

The public also lost confidence as it heard reports of mismanagement among federal regulators charged with issuing permits for oil wells. In this area, Graham said, there has been about 25 years of deference to industry, including a lack of understanding about potential worst-case scenarios.

“There’s a tendency to forget the fact that this property out in the Gulf of Mexico where all this is happening belongs to all of us. It doesn’t belong to BP or any other oil company. It belongs to the people of the United States of America.” Graham said. “We are the landlord. They are lessees. And we need to start acting like the landlord.”

Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson last week applauded the government for its handling of the spill, saying it had to make many split-second decisions without knowing all the risks. “That’s what we as an industry do all the time,” he said.

Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, had a different take. “You can go through issue after issue after issue that clearly we learned a lot about in terms of the inadequacy to deal with the magnitude of an environmental catastrophe that dwarfed anything that had ever happened to the industry,” he said.


© 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=5A2F356C-0B40-32A3-96FE07582DD3D593
MikeyRavioli Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 10-10-2005
Posts: 2,105
Rick, Jim Demint is one member of the Senate. There are 99 others. That makes a total of 100. Out of that 100 59 are Democrat and 41 are Republican. So if Demint was powerful enough to get all 40 other Republicans to vote his way they would still lose 59 to 41. Demint is also considered one of the most conservative Senators. Republicans do not automatically side with him. But again even if they all did 59 to 41.

There is no way one person in the minority could do what you are suggesting. Its a numbers game and the numbers don't add up. If what you say is happening, it could not happen without Democratic support. Otherwise again 59-41.

Which part of this do you not get?

You cannot blame the GOP with a Democratic President and majorities in both Houses. By the way the House of Representatives is 253 Democrats to 178 Republicans.
tailgater Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
OOOHHHHH.

Senator Demint objected.

Why didn't you say so earlier?



ZRX1200 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Jim Demint OUTRAGE!!! Rick you are obsessed with Supena powers but haven't expressed why. This is a political ploy Rick. They knew R's didn't want to waste time on a hearing that wasn't going to actually accomplish anything but provide a platform for pre-election grandstanding. The Dem's get to claim outrage and grandstand (albeit a shorter period than a hearing would provide).
jpotts Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
RICKAMAVEN wrote:
senator demint objected to the request for subpeona power and that is all it took to stop it.

Sen. Jim DeMint, of South Carolina, the new Republican kingpin and enforcer on Capitol Hill. DeMint told Bloomberg Businessweek last week that his goal for the next Senate is "complete gridlock." As far as DeMint is concerned, there's no place for bipartisan compromise or consensus or some "watered-down Republican philosophy," as he put it. For DeMint, this is war. The only acceptable outcome is total victory, and any Republican who dares to disagree will be treated as a traitor during the next election cycle.

ties off, jackets off. backward march


What part of "Democrats completely control everything" didn't you quite get, Rick?

Maybe someone needs to adjust your meds again...
jpotts Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
I mean, it is not Democrats have ever allowed themselves to be restrained by rules in the past. The can simply ignore DeMint's objection, and just go ahead despite it. The steal elections, get dead people to vote form them, partner with ACORN to promote voter fraud, deem sweeping bills as "passed," and so on. Ignoring DeMint would be no more than a drop of water in an ocean of corruption.
jackconrad Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
I never voted for Demint OR PELOSI OR REID OR FRANKS OR FRANKEN etc etc etc..
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
what jim demint did was enough to prevent discussion. it is called coutesy of the senate.

unfounately MikeyRavioli doesn't understand what goes on in the senate.

putxboy doesn't either, but that.s no surprise
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
jpotts wrote:
What part of "Democrats completely control everything" didn't you quite get, Rick?

Maybe someone needs to adjust your meds again...


from jpotts who doesn't understand how the senate works or why this color is called green
ZRX1200 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Classic RICKMAVEN right there yup.
jpotts Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
RICKAMAVEN wrote:
from jpotts who doesn't understand how the senate works or why this color is called green


Once more, Rick: rules have never bothered Democrats before, nor has breaking said rules. So I fail to see how this is a Republican's fault.

Just remember Rick, you're the guy who votes for the scumbags every time - the rest of us ain't that dumb.
donutboy2000 Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 11-20-2001
Posts: 25,000
rick

Dems control Congress + Obama is POTUS + BP paid off Obama + investigation stopped


COINCIDENCE?

OPEN YOUR EYES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ZRX1200 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
CLOSED EYE OUTRAGE!!!!!! You care to explain the need for supena power Rick? They can have a hearing, call them before congress.....wtf buddy?
gringococolo Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 02-04-2006
Posts: 4,626
donutboy2000 wrote:
rick

Dems control Congress + Obama is POTUS + BP paid off Obama + investigation stopped


COINCIDENCE?

OPEN YOUR EYES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



He doesn't speak monkey.

Try this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky

Here are some phrases you should work on:

Three-sign quotations

Apple me eat
Banana Nim eat
Banana me eat
Drink me Nim
Eat Nim eat
Eat Nim me
Eat me Nim
Eat me eat
Finish hug Nim
Give me eat
Grape eat Nim
Hug me Nim
Me Nim eat
Me more eat
More eat Nim
Nut Nim nut
Play me Nim
Tickle me Nim
Tickle me eat
Yogurt Nim eat

Four-sign quotations

Banana Nim banana Nim
Banana eat me Nim
Banana me Nim me
Banana me eat banana
Drink Nim drink Nim
Drink eat drink eat
Drink eat me Nim
Eat Nim eat Nim
Eat drink eat drink
Eat grape eat Nim
Eat me Nim drink
Grape eat Nim eat
Grape eat me Nim
Me Nim eat me
Me eat drink more
Me eat me eat
Me gum me gum
Nim eat Nim eat
Play me Nim play
Tickle me Nim play
Users browsing this topic
Guest