Hypocrite: Obama’s $71,000 from BP staff

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,340
1,650
113
Hypocrites Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton have both accepted large donations from a BP employees committee.

In the donation period ending in 2008, Obama took $71,051, and Clinton $6700 from BP staff in donations.

And three out of the four senators who demanded a meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron over the Anglo-American company's supposed involvement into the release of Abdelbaset al Megrahi have taken political donations from a BP staff organisation (Cameron and any other British politician should only go to the US and take part in meetings with senators only if the US sends George W Bush and other politicians to attend the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War and deports the US serviceman to Britain who has been accused of killing a British soldier in a friendly fire incident. The US has so far refused to do any of this).

Michael Matheson, a Scottish National Party member who sits in the devolved Scottish Parliament has condemned US politicians for accepting such cash, saying: “It’s astonishing that after all the rhetoric and talk of BP funds as ‘blood money’ that those Senators attacking BP have benefited from their donations.”

The Scottish newspaper The Sunday Post has contacted the White House for a comment, but have yet to receive a reply.

Obama’s $71,000 from BP staff

By Campbell Gunn
The Sunday Post
25th July 2010



US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have both accepted large donations from a BP employees committee.

In the donation period ending in 2008, Obama took $71,051, and Clinton $6700 from BP staff in donations.

And three out of the four senators who demanded a meeting with David Cameron last week over Lockerbie and the BP involvement into the release of Abdelbaset al Megrahi, have taken political donations from a BP staff organisation, leading to accusations of hypocrisy.

Senator Robert Menendez, who is chairing this week’s Senate investigation into BP’s involvement in the release of the Lockerbie bomber, received $2000 from the oil giant’s staff committee.

In the donation cycle ending this year, two of the other senators from New York and New Jersey, where many of the bombing victims came from, and who are pressing for an investigation into the bomber’s release — Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer — received $750 and $250 each in donations.

Donations

The donations don’t come from the company itself but from their Political Action Committee — groups of individuals within BP who wish to donate to a particular politician or party.

A number of major oil companies now have drilling interests in Libya — Amerada Hess, Marathon Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, Occidental Petroleum and ConocoPhillips.

In 2010 employees from ConocoPhillips are registered as having made donations to House Democrats of $36,500, Senate Democrats of $17,000.

Marathon Oil staff gave House Democrats $28,500, Senate Democrats $22,500.

Occidental Petroleum workers made donations to House Democrats of $43,000, and Senate Democrats $14,000.

Royal Dutch Shell staff gave Barack Obama $117,946, and Hillary Clinton $20,348.

Condemned

SNP MSP Michael Matheson condemned the US politicians for accepting the cash.

“It’s astonishing that after all the rhetoric and talk of BP funds as ‘blood money’ that those Senators attacking BP have benefited from their donations,” he said.

“It exposes some of the sheer political opportunism currently being played out over the tragic events at Lockerbie and in the Gulf.

“It is hypocritical of these senators, when Kenny MacAskill and Alex Salmond have been clear no discussions or lobbying of the Scottish Government by BP took place.”

A spokesman for BP said it was not their policy to make political donations and added, “The donations come from the Political Action Committee.

“They come under BP’s name, but are from employees, though they’re identified as coming from the company.”

We contacted the White House for a comment, but have yet to receive a reply.

www.sundaypost.co.uk
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
I don't follow the logic of the complaint. He accepted a donation but it didn't affect his decision in this case. Is that what the hypocrisy is?
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
One day they claim he's too tough on BP. The next he's too soft. It's difficult to keep up with this.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Just bash his name for whatever he does, and you'll blend in with the crowd Rick ;)

I agree though, he's really damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't, though to be fair he and his team have not handled this well at all. It's not just those who oppose him who are upset, the progressives who helped elect him are getting ready to throw him to the sharks too.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Nixon used an oil spill off California (< two days worth of this BP mess) to create the clean air act and the epa.

Obama couldn't even manage to get a clean energy/climate bill out of this...and they're blaming environmental NGO's for that.