Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
and is this what you meant by lobbyist for bp ace?
|
Are you surprised when a company, person or any entity acts in a manner that they think is beneficial to their interest? At one of the most basic levels this question illustrates why I am confused by your posts or at least what I take from them. Isn't it expected that in a adversarial situation both sides have to be diligent to ensure fairness? Is it your expectation that there will or can be a time when fairness can be taken for granted? Given what we know based on the article, it is clear that the advocates for the plaintiffs need to get this judge off of any case where there is a conflict of interest. The "system" is equipped to handle these things.
---------- Post added at 02:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
[/COLOR]first i thought a follow-up on the barton escapades
|
Just to be clear. What do you think would have happened to BP if they refused to cooperate with Obama's request for the $20 billion to be administered by his appointee? How would you define, a shake-down?