[Peace-discuss] Any liberals or pwogs saying this?

[John W.]

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:20 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>wrote:



> The comment nevertheless has some interesting characteristics: it is
>
>   (a) a rather sharp contrast - and hence evidence against the existence of
> an
> organized tea party movement - with Rand Paul's objection to Obama's "boot
> heel
> on the throat of BP"; and
>
>   (b) true.


True?  Which part?  True that Sarah Palin made the statement?  Or true that
"if this spill had happened under former Republican
president George W. Bush the scrutiny would have been far tougher" ?




> On 5/24/10 12:58 AM, John W. wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu
>> <mailto:galliher at illinois.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> [The proof of the pudding... Will the administration actually charge BP or
>> force it to clean up?  Don't count on it. --CGE]
>>
>> Probably not, but this is the pot calling the kettle black to an absurd
>> degree.
>>
>> "The former vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor, who champions
>> off-shore drilling, criticized the media for not drawing the link between
>> Obama and big oil and said if this spill had happened under former
>> Republican
>> president George W. Bush the scrutiny would have been far tougher."  Oh,
>> yeah.
>>
>> Palin accuses Obama of being in bed with big oil by Andrew Gully – Sun May
>> 23, 4:47 pm ET
>>
>> WASHINGTON (AFP) – Right-wing darling Sarah Palin accused US President
>> Barack
>> Obama on Sunday of leading a lax response to the Gulf of Mexico spill
>> because
>> he is too close to the big oil companies...
>>
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100524/56cf8c59/attachment.html>