NY Times Lied. Obama Took NO Money From BP Oil.
Abel Malcolm
oil. They reported a few months ago, that "in the 2008
election...Obama...took in $77,000...from BP...executives and its
political action committee." But Obama did no such thing. In fact,
Obama made a deliberate point of refusing to accept any money from BP
in the last presidential election. Obama did not accept contributions
from any political action committees. In marked contrast, they
hypocrit "maverick" John McCain took all the money he could from
BP.
"Friends of the Earth" is the world's largest grassroots environmental
network, and they have a "BP Ten" list that includes John McCain as
one of the ten biggest recipients of money from BP (see link below).
Another person on the BP Ten list is Republican Senate minority leader
Mitch McConnell. 'Friends of the Earth' has asked Sen. John McCain
and Sen. Mitch McConnell, among others, to get rid of this money and
to donate it to cleaning efforts conducted by such organizations as
the Gulf Coast Fund.
Friends of the Earth said this on their web site:
"We can clean up the Gulf while we clean up our politics. Urge the BP
Ten and their peers to donate all the dirty oil dollars they received
in the past two election cycles to the Gulf Coast Fund. Already
signed our petition? Ask your friends to sign! You can also join our
campaign on Facebook by becoming a fan of 'The BP Ten'. Dirty money
pollutes our political process - and as a consequence, the environment
we live in."
During the 2008 and 2010 election cycles, big oil companies pumped
more than $48 million dollars into the political process. None of it
went to Obama, because he did not want it. But Obama would not have
gotten that much from BP anyways, even if he were to accept it. It's
common knowledge that three-fourth of the money that BP gives out,
they give out to Republican candidates only. There's a reason why BP
(and all the other oil companies for that matter) like to donate to
the Republican party. Republicans believe in deregulation, and oil
companies want deregulation. They want government to leave them
alone, oil companies do not want any restrictions at all, so that they
can pollute as much as they want. That's the bottom line for them.
Regulations cut into their profits, and Republicans believe in
deregulation, so that's why the oil companies love Republican
politicians. This explains why Mr. Barton, the senior Republican on
the Energy and Commerce Committe, apologized to BP, Republicans are
beholden to big oil. He also worked as a consultant to Atlantic
Richfield Oil before being elected to Congress. He has long been one
of the top beneficiaries of campaign donations from big oil.
http://www.campaignmoney.org/mccainoil &
http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/2541816/posts?page=8 &
Buster Norris
<abelma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The New York Times falsely reported that Obama took PAC money from BP
>oil. They reported a few months ago, that "in the 2008
>election...Obama...took in $77,000...from BP...executives and its
>political action committee." But Obama did no such thing.
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BP: All Recipients
Obama, Barack (D-Ill) "77,051
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?id=D000000091&type=P&state=&sort=A&cycle=A
HAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cicero Venatio
> The New York Times falsely reported that Obama took PAC money from BP
> oil.
Abel, Oprah has given you fine education, I'm looking forward to your posts.
Abel
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:20:53 -0700 (PDT), Abel Malcolm
>
> >The New York Times falsely reported that Obama took PAC money from BP
> >oil. They reported a few months ago, that "in the 2008
> >election...Obama...took in $77,000...from BP...executives and its
> >political action committee." But Obama did no such thing.
>
> LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> BP: All Recipients
>
> HAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!
From: http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005240042
EXCLUSIVE:
Debunking the myth of Obama's "BP cash"
May 24, 2010
by Julie Millican & Eric Schroeck
On Sunday's Fox News Sunday, Fox News contributor Sarah Palin
ludicrously attempted to tie BP to the Obama administration by
suggesting that President Obama was beholden to the corporation
because of campaign donations he has received. She wondered why no one
was asking "if there's any connection with the contributions made to
President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil
companies to the administration -- if there's any connection there to
President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in
there and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are
seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico."
Like clockwork, media outlets seized on Palin's accusation and cited
Center for Responsive Politics' calculation that Obama had received
$71,051 in BP-linked contributions for his presidential campaign. Only
problem is, contrary to Palin's and the media's suggestions, all of
that money came from BP employees, not BP the company. A spokesman for
the Center for Responsive Politics confirmed Monday that "the $71,051
that Obama received during the 2008 election cycle was entirely from
BP employees." The CRP spokesman also stated that "Obama did not
accept contributions from political action committees, so none of this
money is from BP's PAC. And corporations themselves are prohibited
from donating directly to candidates from their corporate
treasuries."
Why is this an important distinction? Because Obama raised far more
money than any other candidate ever has, therefore, it is completely
unsurprising that Obama also received the most amount of money from BP
employees. Moreover, BP-linked contributions to Obama's campaign are a
drop in the bucket when compared to Obama's total campaign haul. In
addition to the $71,051 Obama received from BP-linked contributors in
2008, Obama's 2004 Senate campaign raised $6,000 from BP-linked
sources, bringing Obama's total BP-related campaign contributions to
77,051. This represents less than .01 percent of the nearly $800
million that Obama raised for his campaigns.