Skip to main content
Report this ad

Two stories this week with conflicting Whitehouse messages

The first story is the oil spill that will never end. In Sept 2009 TransOcean was given permission to drill in the Gulf off the coast of Louisiana. The first request made by BP was to drill in 500ft of water and was approved by the state of Louisiana, but the request was denied in its final form by the Federal Government, they told BP the drilling had to be in 5000ft of water regardless of the fact that no oil spill had ever been worked on in 5000ft of water.

None of this is funny Mr. Gibbs
AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Later this week a Federal judge ruled that President Obama’s 6 month moratorium on drilling on only certain oil rigs was unfounded according to the experts he consulted about the leak. Not one of the experts suggested he shut down all drilling.

Robert Gibbs told reporters after the federal case that …. “President Barack Obama believes strongly that drilling at such depths does not make sense and puts the safety of workers "at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford."

Now if this is in fact true, why was it that the federal government told BP they had to drill in deeper water?

Another troubling question,is why did the federal government Export-Import Bank give 2 billion to Petrobra, a Brazillian oil drilling company to do basically the same thing BP did but in 3 times deeper water? This is in fact an official government agency.

The second story has to do with another Federal Judge who ruled on Tuesday that it will now be illegal to donate any money to a terrorist organization, even if labeled as “humanitarian aid”. Since 2006 Hamas has been on the official State Department Terrorist Organization List.

Shortly after his inauguration, Barack Obama showed his intention of backing this group that had been previously funded by Saudi Arabia and Iran, by promising $900 million to Hamas for “reconstruction”. Recently he added to that total by another $400 million.

Nothing has changed in the political climate with these terrorists, and yet this administration continues to support them. If the definition of treason includes giving comfort and aid to the enemy, President Barack Obama has filled both requirements, and I for one want to know when he will be charged.,2933,499068,00.html



  • JM 5 years ago

    I was wondering the same thing about the funding. How in the world is it OK for him to commit funds to these groups, when it is illegal for everyone else. It really paints a bad picture when the president breaks the law and makes it seem like a good idea. Why is he not accountable.

  • Ship of fools 5 years ago

    "why did the federal government Export-Import Bank give 2 billion to Petrobra"

    To help Oilbamma friend and financier George Soros!?

  • herb 5 years ago

    Chief walking eagle speak with forked tongue!

  • Marty 5 years ago

    There's minor detail left out in that appropriation of $400 million to Hamas. A president cannot appropriate a penny. Congress does that. So if that money ever gets appropriated and sent to Hamas it will only be with the consent of Congress. A bill to appropriate that money to Hamas hasn't even gone to committee. But if it does and if it passes and is signed into law, should we also charge all members of Congress with treason? The money to fund the wars during the Bush administration was passed by Republican and Democratic Congresses. The money to bail out banks and AIG was passed by Congress. I like to blame this president for a lot of bone headed decisions too. But spending doesn't happen without the consent of Congress. And we all keep sending the same stooges back to Congress year after year after year. Why? Because the bring home the bacon/pork. Until we change Congress this country will not change.

Report this ad