North Carolina Congressional Candidate Thinks BP And Government Planned Oil Spill

In North Carolina, Tea Party Republican Bill Randall won his primary election 59% to 41%.

Randall’s victory is significant because he made the claim that the Gulf oil disaster could have been a plot conspired by the federal government and BP.

Randall said that he had no proof that BP would work with the government in blowing up one of their wells, but considered the scenario a possibility.

It is not simply that Randall does not have proof, but that no one has presented a sensible reason why BP would want to blow up one of its wells, put $20 billion into a special account for disrupted lives, take a horrible blow to its image and see its stock value drop precipitously.

In the same token, there is no advantage for Barack Obama to endanger his presidency by creating his own Katrina.

That someone prone to wild speculation can easily capture a nomination with 59% of the vote is a little worrisome. However, Randall’s opponent in the primary, Bernie Reeves, said something that might explain it.

“It’s sort of like anarchy out there, where qualifications and credentials don’t matter,” Reeves said.

This entry was posted in Bill Randall, North Carolina. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to North Carolina Congressional Candidate Thinks BP And Government Planned Oil Spill

  1. polifrog says:

    Randall never said that there might be collusion between BP and the Government to “blow up” the well.

    Your speculation that follows your erroneous “fact” search is therefore just as off base.

    If you want accurate ammo with witch to attack Randall or the Tea Party in general try watching a video of what Randall said concerning Bp. There is plenty of factual ammo there.

    out

  2. Glenn Church says:

    Perhaps you are unaware that the “leak” from the Gulf oil spill came about because of an explosion in which 11 hard-working people with families died. Randall tossed out a conspiracy that BP and feds colluded to create a leak. I don’t believe it.

    “Personally, and this is purely speculative on my part and not based on any fact, but personally I feel there is a possibility that there was some sort of collusion,” Randall told reporters in North Carolina yesterday. “I don’t know how or why, but in that situation, if you have someone from a company violating a safety process and the government signing off on it, excuse me, maybe they wanted it to leak.”

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/tea-party-candidate-in-nc-says-bp-feds-conspired-to-create-spill-video.php

    A three minute video of Randall’s words are here on YouTube.

    Randall is right on that someone should be investigating BP and the federal regulators who let this happen. Then he goes off admitting that he has no facts but only speculation that BP and feds colluded to allow the oil leak. This is the problem plaguing this country today. People are ranting off every speculative thought that comes to their mind. Neither BP nor the federal government have anything to gain with a leak of any size in the Gulf.

    Randall states there might be “collusion” because a leak was desired. He says things got out of control and the rig blew up. However you want to dice his words, he is blaming the explosion on planned negligence. Yes, there might be corruption involved because BP is after maximizing its profits and the regulators probably liked whatever sweet deal they had going with the oil companies. Yet it makes no sense that anyone wanted a leak. Randall should have shut up and kept the speculation to himself.

    Is that an “attack…[on] the Tea Party in general?” I can’t see where you get that anymore than to claim this an attack on Black Republicans or North Carolina Congressional candidates. It’s Randall’s words and Randall’s conspiracy. As far as I know, the Tea Party is not spreading this conspiracy. Of course, if you have info to the contrary, then I would gladly tar anyone, Democrat or Republican, with the same criticism.

  3. polifrog says:

    I see that the words “blow up” were removed from your post after my comments pointing out the inaccuracy, but there has been no note that such editing has occurred since the original post.

    Proper etiquette requires noting that such editing has occurred.

    It is a shame such a nice looking blog is unable to follow proper blog etiquette.

    Finally, not fessing up to your embarrassments belittles your blog while the opposite increases your stature.

    out

  4. Glenn Church says:

    I changed nothing in the post. Actually, you can find “blowing up” in the post. That is because the rig did blow up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>