BP: No oil leaking into Gulf from busted well

[yerasimos]

My take on this:

The industry-wide GOM offshore drilling moratorium is short-sighted. Maybe it would be more appropriate to sideline new GOM drilling projects by the companies under investigation (BP, Halliburton, Transocean come to mind), but that would raise suspicions of cronyism.

I do not consider it appropriate for the USA to be guaranteeing loans to businesses, foreign or otherwise. This goes back further than Obama or Bush 43.

The USA is not in a position to be telling a company what it can or cannot do in foreign waters.

Petrobras looks like some kind of hybrid NOC/quasi-supermajor.

Soros can do what he wants with the money entrusted to him by his investors. I can understand how he wants to move up the food-chain in Petrobras. If I was in the same position, I might decide to upgrade my shares too.

As gun owners, it is more important to watch what he may be doing through IANSA, the UN, and the Brady Bunch. Petrobras is a distant sideshow.

[G26ster]

The USA is not in a position to be telling a company what it can or cannot do in foreign waters.

If we are lending money, i think we can publicly state our opinion, and exert political pressure. We do it all the time in other matters, but the world "loves" to do it to us.

Petrobras looks like some kind of hybrid NOC/quasi-supermajor.

Petrobras is the Brazilian national oil company (NOC), and is a supermajor.

Soros can do what he wants with the money entrusted to him by his investors. I can understand how he wants to move up the food-chain in Petrobras. If I was in the same position, I might decide to upgrade my shares too.

My point was that in order for him to profit the most, the loan needed to be made. I'm just connecting the dots. The left went berserk about Cheney's connection to Halliburton and the contracts that it got. That was bad, bad, bad, but Obama's connection to Soros is just fine.

[yerasimos]

If we are lending money, i think we can publicly state our opinion, and exert political pressure. We do it all the time in other matters, but the world "loves" to do it to us.

I believe that just as other countries have no business telling us what our gun laws should be, we have no business telling other countries what drilling they can or cannot allow in their territorial waters.

Petrobras is the Brazilian national oil company (NOC), and is a supermajor.

I do not see Petrobras listed here, hence I labelled it a quasi-supermajor. Maybe "wannabe-supermajor" would be more accurate, similar to how BP was state-owned for a long period of time and was eventually privatised.

My point was that in order for him to profit the most, the loan needed to be made. I'm just connecting the dots. The left went berserk about Cheney's connection to Halliburton and the contracts that it got. That was bad, bad, bad, but Obama's connection to Soros is just fine.

I definitely agree with you about the media's double standards, but I am skeptical about whether Obama and Soros are so tight together as you imply, and wonder whether the loan guarantee's was the ultimate deal-maker for completing the loan, given Petrobras' continued growth and ascendancy. It seems to me such a loan guarantee would protect the USA-based lenders more than directly benefiting Soros and Petrobras, who could explore other investment opportunities or seek other lenders.

This whole thing has a similar stink as the Obama birth certificate controversy, and I think that criticism of Obama should be focused upon real and demonstrable leadership and policy faults---not diverted toward silly sideshows.

[G26ster]

I do not see Petrobras listed here, hence I labelled it a quasi-supermajor. Maybe "wannabe-supermajor" would be more accurate, similar to how BP was state-owned for a long period of time and was eventually privatised.

Referencing the link below, calling them a Supermajor at this point in time would seem overdue.

PFC Energy: Petrobras Is the World’s 4th Largest Listed Energy Company
1 February 2010

In 2009, Brazil’s Petrobras rose from the ninth to the fourth place in the ranking of the 50 largest listed energy companies in the world, according to calculations by energy consultancy PFC Energy. The calculation considered the companies’ market value in December 2009.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/02 ... 00201.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This whole thing has a similar stink as the Obama birth certificate controversy, and I think that criticism of Obama should be focused upon real and demonstrable leadership and policy faults---not diverted toward silly sideshows.

I'm afraid I don't think Obama's connections to Soros, SEIU, Acorn, and other organizations are a side show. When groups like those are consulted and are helping to write US policy/law, I don't consider it a side show. That's just my opinion.

[yerasimos]

Referencing the link below, calling them a Supermajor at this point in time would seem overdue.

PFC Energy: Petrobras Is the World’s 4th Largest Listed Energy Company
1 February 2010

In 2009, Brazil’s Petrobras rose from the ninth to the fourth place in the ranking of the 50 largest listed energy companies in the world, according to calculations by energy consultancy PFC Energy. The calculation considered the companies’ market value in December 2009.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/02 ... 00201.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They are still partly state-owned, though. One foot firmly planted in the NOC category, the other moving toward the private supermajor category. I stand by my original classification.

This whole thing has a similar stink as the Obama birth certificate controversy, and I think that criticism of Obama should be focused upon real and demonstrable leadership and policy faults---not diverted toward silly sideshows.

I'm afraid I don't think Obama's connections to Soros, SEIU, Acorn, and other organizations are a side show. When groups like those are consulted and are helping to write US policy/law, I don't consider it a side show. That's just my opinion.

They are side shows vis a vis Obama because it is Congress that ultimately drafts, votes upon and passes the laws---before Obama gets to sign or veto any of them. At this stage, trying to paint him with guilt by association just looks frivolous and will not be as effective as raising and sustaining legitimate criticism of his leadership and executive policies.

[G26ster]

They are side shows vis a vis Obama because it is Congress that ultimately drafts, votes upon and passes the laws---before Obama gets to sign or veto any of them. At this stage, trying to paint him with guilt by association just looks frivolous and will not be as effective as raising and sustaining legitimate criticism of his leadership and executive policies.

I am not addressing Obama himself. I am speaking of the Democrat majority in the Gov't. The Progressives in the Democrat party have the support of all the organizations I mentioned, not just Obama, and they vote as a block. If you Believe congress wrote the health care bill, I think you are mistaken, and they voted passage when most/all had never read it. But, I won't argue the point any further.

I'm afraid I don't consider it frivolous for labor unions, redistribution of wealth groups, other special interest groups, major campaign contributors, etc. to be sitting with the President in the White House, having him say that they will be involved with drafting everything he does, while at the same time dismissing ALL the congressional opposition's positions, as politics or invalid. This is far above simple "association." It speaks to leadership, and disrespects the office to which he was elected. He was elected as POTUS of ALL the people, not just the one's he agrees with, or financed his political career.

To hopefully end this debate, let's just say that I believe when you "connect the dots" it's close to criminal, and you believe to do so is frivolous and not legitimate criticism. Reasonable people can always disagree

[yerasimos]

I am not addressing Obama himself. I am speaking of the Democrat majority in the Gov't. The Progressives in the Democrat party have the support of all the organizations I mentioned, not just Obama, and they vote as a block. If you Believe congress wrote the health care bill, I think you are mistaken, and they voted passage when most/all had never read it.

Those who vote on bills without reading them deserve to be voted out, and that is something that we as responsible voters/citizens must accomplish. Obama, Soros, Petrobras, etc having "connections" is irrevelant here.

I'm afraid I don't consider it frivolous for labor unions, redistribution of wealth groups, other special interest groups, major campaign contributors, etc. to be sitting with the President in the White House, having him say that they will be involved with drafting everything he does, while at the same time dismissing ALL the congressional opposition's positions, as politics or invalid. This is far above simple "association." It speaks to leadership, and disrespects the office to which he was elected. He was elected as POTUS of ALL the people, not just the one's he agrees with, or financed his political career.

To hopefully end this debate, let's just say that I believe when you "connect the dots" it's close to criminal, and you believe to do so is frivolous and not legitimate criticism. Reasonable people can always disagree

As much as I dislike Obama, the best strategy to return him to community-organizer status is to highlight his leadership failures and offer up better alternatives. Obsessing over "connections" with SEIU, Soros, ACORN will only stir up the Glenn Beck/Faux-news demographic whose minds are already made up anyway, and will not win any "conquest voters" or effect a lasting change in mainstream public opinion. Sarah "Drill, baby, drill" Palin is not my first choice, but she would be far better than Obama for both gun owners and our nation's near-term energy security, and I believe she may have a fair shot at displacing Obama in 2012.