You mistake Barton's gesture.  He was not apologizing for their grilling due to the spill, he was apologizing for the administrations shake down of the company.  Until you understand that, you will not understand why he has gotten a lot of grass root support for his apology.

As you see, Hayward is not hurting from this. But millions of retirees sure the hell are.  Some from the spill, but a lot from the government extortion of their incomes.

I understand that.  But again, it's about taste and it's about perception.  There's a reason right now why Joe Barton is a bit of a laughing stock. 

On the left?  Definitely because they do not understand what he said and why he said it (nor would they ever question the current regime).  on the Right?  Again, if you are talking about the powdered wigs, you may be right.  If you are talking about the little people, you have not been listening much.

Again, if you are talking about the powdered wigs, you may be right.  If you are talking about the little people, you have not been listening much.

If by "little people" you mean "the mouthbreathers", you're probably right.  I'm not listening to them. 

Again DG:  It's an issue of taste.  You go apologize to the guy who's been the face of the crucifixion, you're casting your lot.  It's a gamble.  In this case, the cat calls have been validated. 

I hate that term.  LIttle people is not much better, but then if I say "Human Beings", most would misunderstand that.  But you do know what I mean.  The solid mass of humanity that does not make headlines daily, but goes about life and does the worl dof moving the mountain one grain of sand at a time.

You are taking things in absolute.  Because BP made a mistake, they must be pure evil.  Intellectually you know that is not the case, yet it is the easy and lazy way of viewing things.  Clearly no one is excusing them for their mistake, but then we should not grab our pitchforks and torches and chase them into the depths of hell either.  They are not monsters.  The Obama regime is trying to portray them as such for their own political gains, but then if you read my recent article you would see that and recognize what he is doing for what it is.  A very feeble attempt to distract all from his own incompetence.

We can vilify those we do not agree with to the point we condone a Krystal Nacht.  But I refuse to be a party to that greater evil.

And this mass of solid humanity is oh so upset about how BP is being treated? 

DG, I don't know how to help you.  If you haven't been paying attention: 

-BP is not very popular right now. 

-BP is amidst eating a whole lot of shit for what happened. 

Right or wrong, those are the facts.  They are undisputed.  When a guy like Barton chooses to go against the grain in a fashion so laughable, the hardened partisans, 'little people', whatever you want to call them are jumping up and down to call him heroic.  Average folks look at him and say "wow, what an idiot".  It's an issue of perception.  I don't know where you're getting this notion that I'm calling them 'monsters' or speaking in some 'absolute'. 

DG, I'm a BP shareholder.  I have every interest in seeing them save their bacon in this mess.  But even I am not sipping some 'little people' koolaid to believe that Joe Barton did me (or anyone) any good, nor am I going to believe that my value is improved by the Tony Hayward trainwreck. 

No, nor did I say "all of them".  They are as different as night and day, but they outnumber the gliteratti by many fold.  I stated what I and others of like mindedness thought.  I was not speaking for all.  I described the class of people because of your usage of a term I find objectionable.  You connected the wrong dots.

So who is arguing either point?

Hitler attacked Stalin.  Are we to rejoice for Hitler or support Stalin?  That is what I and Barton are saying - you do not have to get into bed with either of them.  Yet you seem to think there are only 2 sides to this.  There is not.  I am not supporting BP's handling of the crises, nor am I supporting the unconstitutional shakedown of BP by Obama.  You can assign labels to each as you see fit since in your version there are only 2 sides.  But in your version one has to be right, regardless.

The truth is there is the part about the spill - BP clearly Effed up.  There is the part about the cleanup.  Obama clearly efffed up.  And there is a part about extortion - both effed up, but BP did it by caving to Obama instead of following due process.

I do not see a bunch of support for BP there.  Not by me, or by Barton.  But I do not see a lot of support for the other eff ups either.  By me or Barton.  I know there are many who are going to support Obama for the simple reason that he is against BP.  That means getting into bed with Stalin or Hitler.  Not a great choice for those who insist on just 2 choices.