# So what should Obama have done?



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.

So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?


----------



## rightwinger (Jun 3, 2010)

Obama should have taken charge from day 1 and made all the decisions........  No wait, if he had done that the oil would still be leaking and all these threads would claim he was power hungry and should have let BP handle it

Obama should have sat back and let BP handle it......No wait, by doing that he seems aloof and uncaring about the oil spill....Americans want action from their President

No matter his course of action, the oil well would still be gushing and people would not be satisfied with the results


----------



## Big Black Dog (Jun 3, 2010)

What should Owe Bama have done?  I would have liked it if he resigned.


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Obama did zero

He should have mobilized the army Corp of engineers to assist, instead he went on another vacation - again.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Obama should have taken charge from day 1 and made all the decisions........  No wait, if he had done that the oil would still be leaking and all these threads would claim he was power hungry and should have let BP handle it
> 
> Obama should have sat back and let BP handle it......No wait, by doing that he seems aloof and uncaring about the oil spill....Americans want action from their President
> 
> No matter his course of action, the oil well would still be gushing and people would not be satisfied with the results



Yep, I predict the only realistic (but useless) suggestion I will recieve will be along the lines of the photo op.


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.

Instead he did nothing.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama did zero
> 
> He should have mobilized the army Corp of engineers to assist, instead he went on another vacation - again.



What could they have done? They build bridges, dams, etc, They don't know about cleaning up oil


----------



## Samson (Jun 3, 2010)

He should make James Carville the Gulf Coast Garbage Czar.


----------



## antagon (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.



Another fact free post from wingnut who has NO IDEA what Obama could have done.

I predicted the wingnuts would have no realistic ideas, and I was right so far


----------



## Nonelitist (Jun 3, 2010)

You liberals criticized Bush for not doing something for 5 minutes on 9/11 while reading a book to children.

But then Obama doesn't do anything for 45 days after an environmental disaster and you don't care?  That makes you nothing more than a blind partisan hack.


----------



## Samson (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> ...



I predict you'll say "wingnut" again before the end of the week.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



Obama should have directed US Attorney General Holder and his staff at DOJ to commence a criminal investigation immediately.  Obama has finally done so, but the scope of the investigation needs expand to include the government workers at Minerals Management Service that crawled into bed with BP and allowed them to so badly damage our country.

From hour one, it has been apparent that BP never had adequate fail-safes nor a clean up plan.  Both were required to obtain the permit, so BP lied on its application and almost certainly, the staff at MMS knew it had lied.  EVERYONE involved should go to prison; Tony "I Want My Life Back" Hayworth, BP's CEO, should have been extradicted and remanded without bail ASAP.

Interior Probe Finds Fraternizing, Porn and Drugs at MMS Office in La. - NYTimes.com

U.S. Opens Criminal Inquiry Into Oil Spill - NYTimes.com

And for sure, Obama needs to EFFECTIVELY tighten environmental controls.

Oil Companies Weigh Strategies to Fend Off Tougher Regulations - NYTimes.com

U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits - NYTimes.com

Despite Moratorium, Drilling Projects Move Ahead - NYTimes.com

Feds approve new Gulf oil well off Louisiana | cleveland.com

A kindergartner could see the right things to be doing here.  WTF is taking Obama so long?


----------



## theHawk (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



I never critisized him for his inactions in the first few weeks, there really isn't much he can do.  What he should be doing now is at least direct his agencies to allow the states to take action themselves, like LA.  

What Jindal said really hit the nail on the head:



> JINDAL:  We didn't need another meeting.  We didn't ask for another meeting.  On Friday with the president, we were very clear: *It's not the process that interests us; it's the outcomes*.  So many may ask, "Are you happy with the meeting? Are you happy with the process?"  I could care less about the meeting; I could care less about the process.  There were a lot of professors there.  And I told them when I had a chance to speak at the end, I said, "To me this is not a multiple choice test. This is not an essay test. This is a pass-fail. This is a yes-no test. This is pretty simple: *If we get approval to move forward on at least our first six segments, then this will have been a successful day*.  If we do not get approval to move forward, *this will have been a waste of another day*; we could have spend this day fighting the oil and doing other things to help safeguard our coast."  So for us this wasn't about process.



No one is expecting a miracle solution.  But the least our Empty-Suit-in-Chief can do is try to help eliminate all this bureaucracy.  And it wouldn't hurt if he stopped trying to vilify BP.


----------



## xotoxi (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.


 
Be more specific.


----------



## strollingbones (Jun 3, 2010)

i think he should have at least gone to the gulf..and gave it a higher priority than he did...i think he should have insisted that the relief well drilling begin in earnest...not waited for all else to fail...which is what bp has done...i think he should have called up all the experts in this field and formed a 'think tank'

are you willing to admit that obama has been a failure as an enviromental crusader.....i  am in nc...he announced he was for drilling on the east coast...this of course was before the failure of this rig...now do you know there is another rig..atlantis ...that is questionable shape and expected to fail....but its still pumping...

the one seemingly sure solution to reducing this oil flow seems to be a relief well.....why wasnt that began from day one?  o cause bp is trying cheaper solutions...

do you have any idea of the enviromental impact this is having on the gulf coast?

and yet obama goes to play golf...fuck that mal....we all cried fault when bush ignored katrina.....well this is another disaster being ignored..there is no difference in parties ....government is just that...government with no regard to the people...


----------



## strollingbones (Jun 3, 2010)

Atlantis Platform, Gulf of Mexico - Offshore Technology

check that bitch out...and yet it still pumps....obama should do something about that...shouldnt he?

and before you roll in here all big and bad with your notions of who is what and what is whom?

let me discuss this with you....i am a fucking liberal democrat...i am not happy with obama...if your partisan ass cant see whats going on..that is on you....but stop your fucking...yall are this and yall are that...you are too new here to know the lay of the land....


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama did zero
> 
> He should have mobilized the army Corp of engineers to assist, instead he went on another vacation - again.



WHen Katrina hit bush was on vacation. He didn't end his vacation until several days later.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> You liberals criticized Bush for not doing something for 5 minutes on 9/11 while reading a book to children.
> 
> But then Obama doesn't do anything for 45 days after an environmental disaster and you don't care?  That makes you nothing more than a blind partisan hack.



Another conservative who has no ideas; just lies


----------



## AllieBaba (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.



He threatened BP, don't forget.

What a loser. And Holder, who refused to prosecute militant blacks who terrorized voters at voting booths is going to prosecute like hell on this one.


----------



## xsited1 (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> So what should Obama have done?



Anderson Cooper said this last week:



> COOPER: It is sort of fascinating, David (GERGEN), for a president who watched Katrina and saw the- you know, the failures of the Bush administration- and there were failures, also, at the state and local level, we all know, in Katrina. But for a president who saw that and- you know, was very critical of it, to now find himself in a situation in which he's being criticized for the lack of response or lack of coordination, is kind of stunning.
> 
> Read more: CNN&#039;s Cooper: It&#039;s &#039;Stunning&#039; Obama Let Oil Leak Become &#039;Katrina in Slow Mo&#039; | NewsBusters.org



Obama said "the American people should know that from the moment this disaster began, the federal government has been in charge of the response effort."  What the world sees is a lack of response and a lack of coordination by the Federal government to stop this.    Obamas aloof detachment is a big part of the problem.  He needs to be more emotive, have daily progress reports, provide a website with up-to-the-minute updates, etc.  This should have started from day 1.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

Madeline said:


> Obama should have directed US Attorney General Holder and his staff at DOJ to commence a criminal investigation immediately.   Obama has finally done so, but the scope of the investigation needs expand to include the government workers at Minerals Management Service that crawled into bed with BP and allowed them to so badly damage our country.



First, I want to thank you for a serious response. It's rare.

Secondly, there was no evidence of criminal activity at the time of the explosion, so a criminal investigation was not warranted at that time. Furthermore, a criminal investigation does nothing to clean up the oil. It is undoubtedly the right thing to do, but it does nothing for the cleanup effort.

Thirdly, the workers at MMS *are* being investigated. However, that will do nothing as far as cleaning up the oil.



> From hour one, it has been apparent that BP never had adequate fail-safes nor a clean up plan.  Both were required to obtain the permit, so BP lied on its application and almost certainly, the staff at MMS knew it had lied.  EVERYONE involved should go to prison; Tony "I Want My Life Back" Hayworth, BP's CEO, should have been extradicted and remanded without bail ASAP.



I agree, but again, that does nothing for the cleanup effort. Obama is being criticized but it has nothing to do with delaying a criminal investigation; he is being criticizing for not starting the cleanup response quick enough.



> And for sure, Obama needs to EFFECTIVELY tighten environmental controls.



Again, I agree with you but this has nothing to do with the issue I spoke about in the OP - the cleanup.



> A kindergartner could see the right things to be doing here.  WTF is taking Obama so long?[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]



Only a kindergartner would think that criminal investigations can begin with the wave of Obama's magic wand, and besides, as the links you posted reveal, you already KNOW that Obama has been investigating MMS.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 3, 2010)

theHawk said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> ...



Why does Obama hate Gov "Gin Doll"?




> JINDAL:  We didn't need another meeting.  We didn't ask for another meeting.  On Friday with the president, we were very clear: *It's not the process that interests us; it's the outcomes*.  So many may ask, "Are you happy with the meeting? Are you happy with the process?"  I could care less about the meeting; I could care less about the process.  There were a lot of professors there.  And I told them when I had a chance to speak at the end, I said, "To me this is not a multiple choice test. This is not an essay test. This is a pass-fail. This is a yes-no test. This is pretty simple: *If we get approval to move forward on at least our first six segments, then this will have been a successful day*.  If we do not get approval to move forward, *this will have been a waste of another day*; we could have spend this day fighting the oil and doing other things to help safeguard our coast."  So for us this wasn't about process.



Oh, that's why, Gov "Gin Doll" is running circles around the Boy who would be President


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

strollingbones said:


> i think he should have at least gone to the gulf..and gave it a higher priority than he did...



Just as I predicted - the whiners don't care about the working people on the Gulf who are suffering. They just want a photo op



> i think he should have insisted that the relief well drilling begin in earnest...not waited for all else to fail...which is what bp has done...



Umm, Obama insisted that BP drill TWO relief wells. He didn't wait for anything.



> i think he should have called up all the experts in this field and formed a 'think tank'



He did that the day after the explosion



> are you willing to admit that obama has been a failure as an enviromental crusader.....i  am in nc...he announced he was for drilling on the east coast...this of course was before the failure of this rig...now do you know there is another rig..atlantis ...that is questionable shape and expected to fail....but its still pumping...



Yes, unlike the wingnuts, I am able to admit that Obama has a poor record on the environment. However, that's not a justification to spread lies about the feds response to this disaster.

Basically, the suggestions you gave, with one exception (the predicted photo op) were already implemented soon after the disaster occurred



> the one seemingly sure solution to reducing this oil flow seems to be a relief well.....why wasnt that began from day one?  o cause bp is trying cheaper solutions...



It was the solution from the beginning. However, it takes at least three months to dig a relief well. Do you think Obama should have just sat around and waited?



> do you have any idea of the enviromental impact this is having on the gulf coast?





> and yet obama goes to play golf...fuck that mal....we all cried fault when bush ignored katrina.....well this is another disaster being ignored..there is no difference in parties ....government is just that...government with no regard to the people...



Like I said, you have no justification for peddling lies. Obama isn't going to dive into the gulf and plug the leak single handedly. He's not superman. 

He didn't ignore anything and has been responsive from the moment he was informed of the explosion. You're just upset because you're not getting your photo op of Obama wearing boots on a beach.



> let me discuss this with you....i am a fucking liberal democrat...i am not happy with obama...if your partisan ass cant see whats going on..that is on you....but stop your fucking...yall are this and yall are that...you are too new here to know the lay of the land....



OK. I'm also a fucking liberal democrat and I'm unhappy with obama, but that doesn't justify spreading lies and pretending that Obama didn't insist that BP drill two relief wells from the beginning. I may be new here, but I know better than to lie


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > So what should Obama have done?
> ...



And another rightwinger proves they have no idea, just lies and hate for Obama.

And as I predicted, the only thing this one can think of is "be more emotive" and other useless posturing that does nothing to clean up the oil

Conservatives got nothing. No ideas. No morals. No principles. Just lies and hate


----------



## masquerade (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?


Have you asked any left-winged liberal democrats if they have any solutions to the oil leak?  How many folks here on USMB are deep water explorers or have worked on oil rigs to be able to offer a legit fix?  This question is for both the left and the right.  Folks are frustrated and angry and they come here to voice those frustrations.  

_Conservatives got nothing. No ideas. No morals. No principles. Just lies and hate _

Again, what do liberals have?
They had plenty of lies and hate for Bush when Katrina happened.
Imagine for a moment that Bush was still President during this crisis.   People would be screaming that he was in bed with big OIL for years .... this is all his fault.  Impeach him!


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

Count Dracula said:


> What should Owe Bama have done?  I would have liked it if he resigned.



Why?


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.



Show us his personal skill set that would have helped plug that leak in some way.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

> Have you asked any left-winged liberal democrats if they have any solutions to the oil leak?



Yes.



> How many folks here on USMB are deep water explorers or have worked on oil rigs to be able to offer a legit fix?



IOW, it's OK when people who know nothing about it whine about what is and isn't being done, but it's wrong for others to ask them what they think should have been done



masquerade said:


> Again, what do liberals have?



Brains. If you had one, maybe you'd offer an idea instead of using the oh-so-mature "You're rubber, I"m glue" defense.

Another whiner with no ideas, and no clue. You've put yourself in the position of defending critics who even you admit, don't know what they're talking about.


----------



## xotoxi (Jun 3, 2010)

Count Dracula said:


> What should Owe Bama have done? I would have liked it if he resigned.


 
In that case, what would you have liked President Biden to have done?  Resign?

Then what would you like President Pelosi do have done?


----------



## masquerade (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> > Again, what do liberals have?
> ...


Bwaaaaaahahahahaha!!!

Okay sangha ... what idea do YOU have?  Hmmmm?  Instead of an attempt at insulting, tell me what idea you have.  If it's a good one, perhaps you should contact Mr. Obama and let him know.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

masquerade said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > masquerade said:
> ...



Here's a clue - No one knows how to stop the leak. No has enough equipment to keep all of the oil off of our coastline. Those who are whining about this KNOW this, but they will lie and pretend there is something else Obama could have done, but they will never mention what it is because they are lying.

I, on the other hand, have no need to lie. I haven't criticized Obama for not responding because I know there isn't much he can do. It's hypocritical to insist that Obama could have done something, and then run for the hills when asked to explain exactly what he could have done.

So if I think Obama is doing all he can do, why would I have any suggestions about things he is already doing? That makes no sense. The people who are lying and saying that Obama didn't do all he could should tell us specifically what it was that he didn't do.

But like I said before, the whiners don't have a clue. The reason they are complaining is that they hate and they lie. It's what whiners do


----------



## boedicca (Jun 3, 2010)

What Obama should have done:

1.  Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.

2.  Gone to the gulf immediately.  Leadership matters.   Whether or not one likes Bush, his presence at Ground Zero after 9/11 was effective.  Being There is half the job of leadership.   

3.  Developed and communicated a Vision of:  Job One is stopping the spill and containing the oil to prevent further damage.  Job Two is Clean Up.  Job Three is Restoration.  Job Four is Investigation, and Financial, Legal, and Regulatory remedies and reforms.  Let's focus now on saving the environment and the ecology of the Gulf.  We have plenty of time to analyze and address what happened after the emergency is over.   And then initiated the efforts in those priorities.

4.  Listened to Jindal and gotten the permits and resources LA and other states needed to protect their coasts.

5.  Left politics and blame throwing out of it.  This is an issue that affects all Americans, a great many of whom are going through severe hardship right now.   To fix the problem as quickly as possible requires the focus of all available resources.  Making an enemy of BP by making them a target of a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION is distract their resources from the emergency.

6.  Cleared the calendar of discretionary leisure activities such as vacations, golf, and parties.   It's too much Nero and Marie Attoinette combined - and shows a callousness detachment that if very poor leadership.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> What Obama should have done:
> 
> 1.  Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.



You don't think that BP did that....or the Administration didn't confirm that they had done that?   Could you please show which independent experts are not being used in this case?



> 2.  Gone to the gulf immediately.  Leadership matters.   Whether or not one likes Bush, his presence at Ground Zero after 9/11 was effective.  Being There is half the job of leadership.



I partially agree....but as having dealt with VIP visits in the past, it is a PR stunt only.   Are you complaining NOW that  Obama did NOT perform a PR stunt?



> 3.  Developed and communicated a Vision of:  Job One is stopping the spill and containing the oil to prevent further damage.  Job Two is Clean Up.  Job Three is Restoration.  Job Four is Investigation, and Financial, Legal, and Regulatory remedies and reforms.  Let's focus now on saving the environment and the ecology of the Gulf.  We have plenty of time to analyze and address what happened after the emergency is over.   And then initiated the efforts in those priorities.



What part of this(except for the Investigation) could  Obama have  done better than BP?   Please be specific.



> 4.  Listened to Jindal and gotten the permits and resources LA and other states needed to protect their coasts.



Clarify what permits Jindal asked for that were not granted.   Need more information on this before commenting.



> 5. * Left politics and blame throwing out of it.*  This is an issue that affects all Americans, a great many of whom are going through severe hardship right now.   To fix the problem as quickly as possible requires the focus of all available resources.  Making an enemy of BP by making them a target of a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION is distract their resources from the emergency.



Wait a minute....WHO is using politics and blame throwing here?   Obama is?   Really?



> 6.  Cleared the calendar of discretionary leisure activities such as vacations, golf, and parties.   It's too much Nero and Marie Attoinette combined - and shows a callousness detachment that if very poor leadership.



Maybe...but sounds like you WANT Obama to do PR stunts and you WANT Obama to go for appearances.  Is that what you want?


----------



## rightwinger (Jun 3, 2010)

What Obama should have done:

1. Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.
* I think this is being done, I'm sure the subject matter experts have all been brought in, its just that options are limited*
2. Gone to the gulf immediately. Leadership matters. Whether or not one likes Bush, his presence at Ground Zero after 9/11 was effective. Being There is half the job of leadership. 

* Agree, Obama repeated Bush's Katrina mistake of not providing Presidential level leadership at a national catastrophe*

3. Developed and communicated a Vision of: Job One is stopping the spill and containing the oil to prevent further damage. Job Two is Clean Up. Job Three is Restoration. Job Four is Investigation, and Financial, Legal, and Regulatory remedies and reforms. Let's focus now on saving the environment and the ecology of the Gulf. We have plenty of time to analyze and address what happened after the emergency is over. And then initiated the efforts in those priorities.

* I'm sure this is in place......problem is that they can't get past Job 1*

4. Listened to Jindal and gotten the permits and resources LA and other states needed to protect their coasts.

*  Not sure it is just permits, but we need a concentrated federal response to the whole Gulf Coast Region, not just fulfil the wish list from each Governor affected*

5. Left politics and blame throwing out of it. This is an issue that affects all Americans, a great many of whom are going through severe hardship right now. To fix the problem as quickly as possible requires the focus of all available resources. Making an enemy of BP by making them a target of a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION is distract their resources from the emergency.

* Mostly agree....we do not want BP to go into the mode of mitigating potential civil and criminal  actions......*

6. Cleared the calendar of discretionary leisure activities such as vacations, golf, and parties. It's too much Nero and Marie Attoinette combined - and shows a callousness detachment that if very poor leadership. 

* Red Herring.........Americans are not dying while this is going on. All Presidents take personal time off during extended crisis. FDR went on vacation while WWII was going on, LBJ and Nixon took time off during Viet Nam.  If not playing golf will end the spill any quicker, then he should not play golf...otherwise  STFU*


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

IF THE GUY CAN WEAR THAT FUNNY GET-UP WITH THE SYMBOL ON HIS CHEST AND THE CAPE AND THE FUNKY BOOTS AND FLY FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT AND STOP A MAJOR EARTHQUAKE IN ITS TRACKS, then certainly he should have been able to dive down to the bottom of the Gulf of Mehico and plug a small leak in a ruptured pipe.

Oh wait.

That was Superman, wasn't it?

Ok.  Let's take another look.  The President should have diverted the hurricane and ordered the Governor and the Mayor to prepare evacuation plans and ...

Wait.  That was the Katrina mess and the prior President.  

Ok.  Attempt number three:

The President should ABSOLUTELY make it his FIRST order of business to do absolutely NOTHING for a week.  Then, when the nature of the pending catastrophe is manifestly clear, the NEXT thing he should have done was to mobilize an army of lawyers and bureaucrats because THAT'S the stuff that will effectively seal the leak!  

No.  Wait.  That's what he DID.  Clearly that's just stupid.

Ok.  I've got it.

MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.  And simultaneously, he might have directed the Army Corp (pronounced "corpse") of Engineers and his National Science Adviser and the Secretary of the Interior and the Coast Guard to come up with a plan to SEAL the freakin' leak with the cooperation of BP or over their irrelevant objections.  As it was, BP wasn't the one putting up objections.  That was the hideous national bureaucracy imposing the mindless hurdles and obstacles.  

I would have liked it if the nations CHIEF EXECUTIVE had directed his underlings to cut through ALL stupid ass red tape in order to actually deal with the problem.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> What Obama should have done:
> 
> 1.  Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.



That is exactly what Obama did do




> 2.  Gone to the gulf immediately.  Leadership matters.   Whether or not one likes Bush, his presence at Ground Zero after 9/11 was effective.  Being There is half the job of leadership.



Like I predicted, the wingnuts are fixated on photo ops.    



> 3.  Developed and communicated a Vision of:  Job One is stopping the spill and containing the oil to prevent further damage.  Job Two is Clean Up.  Job Three is Restoration.  Job Four is Investigation, and Financial, Legal, and Regulatory remedies and reforms.  Let's focus now on saving the environment and the ecology of the Gulf.  We have plenty of time to analyze and address what happened after the emergency is over.   And then initiated the efforts in those priorities.



Again, that is exactly what he has done.



> 4.  Listened to Jindal and gotten the permits and resources LA and other states needed to protect their coasts.



Again, that is exactly what he has done.

BTW, Jindals plans won't keep any oil off of the beaches; it merely will shift the oil to another beach, and that's if the berms actually hold up in a storm, which they often do not.



> 5.  Left politics and blame throwing out of it.  This is an issue that affects all Americans, a great many of whom are going through severe hardship right now.   To fix the problem as quickly as possible requires the focus of all available resources.



BWAHAHAHAHA!!! You want to leave the blame throwing out of it?? What a hypocrit you wingnuts are.



> Making an enemy of BP by making them a target of a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION is distract their resources from the emergency.



Another wingnut makes the ridiculous claim that the investigation will interfere with cleanup effort. Another wingnut with no facts to back that up.



> 6.  Cleared the calendar of discretionary leisure activities such as vacations, golf, and parties.   It's too much Nero and Marie Attoinette combined - and shows a callousness detachment that if very poor leadership.



And again, the wingnut who wants to take politics out of it also wants the president to go on photo ops.

Bottom line - the reasonable suggestions you make have all been implemented by Obama. all you've got is photo ops.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



Obama has a public image problem with this thing. He should have done the politically correct thing and not taken Memorial Day weekend for a Chicago visit, but instead spent the weekend somewhere on the Gulf with his family. He's given the "appearance" of not caring, which is of course what the right wing noise machine jumps all over. Obama's mistake is still not realizing that he needs to check, double-check, and double-check again his every word, his every move, or he will immediately be the object of criticism.


----------



## manifold (Jun 3, 2010)

He should've plugged it up with a Ravi-sized tampon.


----------



## sangha (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> The President should ABSOLUTELY make it his FIRST order of business to do absolutely NOTHING for a week.  Then, when the nature of the pending catastrophe is manifestly clear, the NEXT thing he should have done was to mobilize an army of lawyers and bureaucrats because THAT'S the stuff that will effectively seal the leak!
> 
> No.  Wait.  That's what he DID.  Clearly that's just stupid.



Umm, Obama had the Coast Guard on the scene within hours of the explosion. Within 24 hours he had begun assembling a team of experts, and sending the navy in.



> MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.



That is exactly what Obama has done. BP is paying fishermen up to $3000/day for the work



> And simultaneously, he might have directed the Army Corp (pronounced "corpse") of Engineers and his National Science Adviser and the Secretary of the Interior and the Coast Guard to come up with a plan to SEAL the freakin' leak with the cooperation of BP or over their irrelevant objections.



Neither the ACE nor the NSA have any knowledge of how to clean an oil spill in deep water. The Sec'y of the Interior doesn't know either, but he has people working for him that do, and they were consulted immediately.

Secondly, there is no plan to seal the leak because no one, absolutely no one, knows how to do it. You can assemble as many scientists as you like, but they still won't know.



> As it was, BP wasn't the one putting up objections.  That was the hideous national bureaucracy imposing the mindless hurdles and obstacles.
> 
> I would have liked it if the nations CHIEF EXECUTIVE had directed his underlings to cut through ALL stupid ass red tape in order to actually deal with the problem.



What you call "stupid ass red tape" is also known as "the law". We have a president, not a king. If you want to live in a dictatorship, then move to one.

So far, the wingnut response to my question has been

1) Continue whining about how Obama did nothing while offering no ideas
2) Offer suggestions about things that Obama has already done
3) Offer suggestions that are unrealistic (like making regulations disappear)
4) Demand photo ops and other actions that do nothing to cleanup the oil


----------



## xsited1 (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



  You're just an idiot troll.  I am neither a right-winger nor a conservative.  You asked a question and I gave a valid answer.  I identified you as a troll yesterday.  I don't know why I thought you would be any different today.

Next.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

He should have gone on television and cried and wrung his hands at the damage unleashed by BP's fuck up.

Other than that, I can't honestly think of anything else...except putting all business in the USA on hold while officials audited the previous administration for mistakes, fuck ups, and greed.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 3, 2010)

Obama should follow the lesson of some Japanese executive who could no longer live with shaming their company and their nation by their incompetence.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

Here's a complete, comprehensive timeline of the entire event, up to the minute, *with sourced links *(since the cons here will insist the information comes from a "biased" website).

BP Gulf Oil Spill Cheat Sheet: A Timeline of Unfortunate Events : TreeHugger

To continue to claim that "nothing was done" isn't just ignorant, it's downright illiterate.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

AllieBaba said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> ...



Sure, like the JD has the time and resources to prosecute every instance of racism, whether perpetrated by blacks or whites. Time to get over that one, dear.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Obama should follow the lesson of some Japanese *executive* who could no longer live with shaming their company and their nation by their incompetence.



So, the head of BP should commit seppeku?    (Otherwise, I'm not sure what you are driving at)


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Here's a complete, comprehensive timeline of the entire event, up to the minute, *with sourced links *(since the cons here will insist the information comes from a "biased" website).
> 
> BP Gulf Oil Spill Cheat Sheet: A Timeline of Unfortunate Events : TreeHugger
> 
> To continue to claim that "nothing was done" isn't just ignorant, it's downright illiterate.



No...it's quite intentional.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > So what should Obama have done?
> ...



And if he had done that? His haters would never go to a government website, for one thing. They consider all of it lies, lies and more lies. So why bother? There are plenty of sites that provide up to the minute details, but it's becoming waaaaaaaaaay too obvious that many people aren't even bothering to check out those either. It's just so much more fulfilling to sit and bitch that "nothing is being done" and hope that stupid accusation sticks to the next moron who reads it, than to actually find out what's been going on.

Also, for Obama to plant himself somewhere on the Gulf would also be criticized as just photo ops. You know it and I know it. 

This isn't "Katrina" which went away after the storm left a path of destruction that could be dealt with from that point on. This is an ongoing path of destruction. So how long should Obama put everything else on the calendar on hold while he prances around New Orleans for the benefit of his critics who hate him anyway?


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

It's amazing to watch the dishonest Obamabots pretend that the President DID anything when it is crystal clear that he actually did nothing.

Sending out damn bureaucrats and lawyers is not really "doing" something, just to put word to the glaringly obvious.


----------



## xsited1 (Jun 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Your lack of faith in Anderson Cooper's investigative prowess is disappointing.  Even he sees that there is a lack of response and a lack of coordination by the Federal government to stop this.  But hey, if I got a lot of campaign money from BP like Obama did, I'd probably sit on my hands for a few weeks as well.


----------



## The Rabbi (Jun 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> What Obama should have done:
> 
> 1.  Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.
> 
> ...



What she said.  Obama spent the first month blaming everyone for anything he could, including Pres Bush.  Now he is threatening criminal action.  That is sure to send a message of partnership and trust with BP.
BP has forgotten more about oil engineering than BO will ever know.  BO has no, zero, expertise.  Congress has even less.  What BO could have done is quit the politicising and point scoring and actually tried to help.  He should have established a joint committee with industry experts and government agencies to map out what can be done to mitigate the spill and cap the well.
But instead he decided to score points by criticizing BP, criticizing Bush, and demonizing the oil industry. It's the Chicago Way.


----------



## manifold (Jun 3, 2010)

I'm surprised and disappointed that the free market hasn't plugged the leak yet.

What gives?


----------



## The Rabbi (Jun 3, 2010)

manifold said:


> I'm surprised and disappointed that the free market hasn't plugged the leak yet.
> 
> What gives?



If you think the free market can't plug the leak, wait til you see what government can't do.
Aren't there still people in NOLA living in gov't trailers?


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

masquerade said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> ...



It's probably only human that people would blame the lead dog, whomever that might be. And I accept that as valid (although lame) criticism of Obama too. HOWEVER, it's the idiots who continue to be ill-informed making their dumb claims that really pisses me off. Michelle Bachman and her fiery speech the other day made the absurd claim that the Coast Guard was nowhere, among other UNinformed theatrical statements, which her adoring audience just lapped up as gospel truth.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> > I'm surprised and disappointed that the free market hasn't plugged the leak yet.
> ...


The free market put them there...selling them insurance policies and not covering the destruction of their property.

Regardless, where IS this mighty free market in all of this? Oh, yeah...probably pushing as much money into the pockets of their CEOs as they can get away with.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

boedicca said:


> What Obama should have done:
> 
> 1.  Put out an immediate search to gather the best independent experts in the world in the various disciplines required to deal with containment, clean up, and restoration.
> How do you know he didn't? There have been plenty of experts from all over who have weighed in. Just because you don't get all the insider information doesn't mean stuff doesn't happen under your radar.
> ...




As I said, in order to appease the public, Obama should have created a more concerned image, but, again, how many of the people who absolutely positively despise him anyway would have even accepted that? These are the ones who wail that they can't stand to even look or listen to him, no matter what he says. And how many of those kinds of folks are residents of Louisiana? But now they would accept Obama's sympathy and/or hugs? Yeah, right...


----------



## The Rabbi (Jun 3, 2010)

Ravi said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > manifold said:
> ...



Well,no that's of course a lie.  the people living in trailers came from gov't housing to begin with.  So the free market had nothing to do with it.
But dream on, comrade!


----------



## Nonelitist (Jun 3, 2010)

I have a prediction about the next political scandal.

Members of Obamas cabinet will be found to have divested themselves of BP stock just before announcing the criminal investigation.

Just watch.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > xsited1 said:
> ...



Everyone who disagrees with you is a "troll."


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...


No, they didn't.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...


With xsited, first everyone is a troll, then they are a racist. It gets old, but he has a small imagination.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> It's amazing to watch the dishonest Obamabots pretend that the President DID anything when it is crystal clear that he actually did nothing.
> 
> Sending out damn bureaucrats and lawyers is not really "doing" something, just to put word to the glaringly obvious.



They simply don't come anymore stupid than you. You must take great pleasure in being dumbed down. And in case you're thinking about coming back at me with some of your filthy insults, you're going on ignore so I don't have to puke up my breakfast.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> > xsited1 said:
> ...



Well, from the Anderson Cooper discussion, there's this:



> COOPER: Well, seeing him walk the beaches, I think it was yesterday- you know, with camera crews following him, this photo op- you know, finally, I guess, they decided not have him be interviewed in offices, because that made him look bad. So he was out on the beach. But- you know, to see him walk the beach followed by cameras was kind of a- you know, manufactured situation-
> 
> BRINKLEY: Yes.



It didn't matter WHEN Obama went down there, it still would have been criticized as a photo op. If he had immediately gone down, the criticism would have been that the entourage of Secret Service would have just been in the way "AND DIDN'T OBAMA KNOW THAT, THE STUPID FUCK?"

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Nuff said.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

MaggieMae said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > It's amazing to watch the dishonest Obamabots pretend that the President DID anything when it is crystal clear that he actually did nothing.
> ...



But wait...then you'd miss his cute nickname for  you.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > What Obama should have done:
> ...



So, you AGREE that BP is the one to fix this problem and not Obama.


----------



## manifold (Jun 3, 2010)

What should Obama have done differently?

Well for starters, when the genie in the bottle granted him one wish, he should've been more specific when he wished for the country to become blacker.

*rimshot


----------



## Samson (Jun 3, 2010)

manifold said:


> What should Obama have done differently?
> 
> Well for starters, when the genie in the bottle granted him one wish, he should've been more specific when he wished for the country to become blacker.
> 
> *rimshot





What's sad is I think you're actually trying to be politically correct.


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Help plug the fucking hole.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama did zero
> 
> He should have mobilized the army Corp of engineers to assist, instead he went on another vacation - again.



And just what were the Army Corp of Engineers to do?  They are not oilfield or deep water experts????


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Help plug the fucking hole.


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History

By the 1980s the Corps' mission had expanded from flood fighting to other hazards. Consequently, the Corps established an emergency management program. In 1988 the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act authorized the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide for all disasters, regardless of cause. The Corps works closely with FEMA in many natural disasters including floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.


*

Between 1989 and 1992, the Corps responded to the largest and most destructive oil spill in U.S. history in Prince William Sound in Alaska. I*t also responded to Hurricane Hugo, which caused major damage in the Virgin Islands and coast of the Carolinas, and to the Loma Prieta Earthquake in California. The 1990s brought even costlier natural disasters. Between 1992 and 1995 the Corps performed major repair and rehabilitation work in the wake of Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki, record flooding on the Mississippi and Missouri rivers, and the Northridge earthquake in California.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 3, 2010)

He should have asked Bush and Cheney for help


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.



You do realize that doing nothing was all that he could do.  The feds don't have the expertise or equipment to perfom deep sea oil rig repairs.  Some of you sound like the 'do anything crowd as long as you do something even if it doesn't work'.  As if you need to be placated by action for action's sake.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

CrusaderFrank said:


> He should have asked Bush and Cheney for help



HAHAHA.....Cheney aka Halliburton, helped cause the problem.  And you know neither one has solutions for anything.


----------



## xotoxi (Jun 3, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> I have a prediction about the next political scandal.
> 
> Members of Obamas cabinet will be found to have divested themselves of BP stock just before announcing the criminal investigation.
> 
> Just watch.



Are you claiming that they should NOT sell their BP stock?

Are you claiming that they should not have owned the BP stock in the first place?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > He should have asked Bush and Cheney for help
> ...



How do you know that? This just proves Obama should have called them in.


----------



## xotoxi (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.



Does the President of the United States have the power to order a privately owned company to hire people?

I've never heard of this one.

I could see a court mandating something like this...but even this would cause right-wingers to fill their pants with copious amounts of shit.


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> ...



I already posted this...

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History

By the 1980s the Corps' mission had expanded from flood fighting to other hazards. Consequently, the Corps established an emergency management program. In 1988 the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act authorized the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide for all disasters, regardless of cause. The Corps works closely with FEMA in many natural disasters including floods, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions.


*

Between 1989 and 1992, the Corps responded to the largest and most destructive oil spill in U.S. history in Prince William Sound in Alaska. I*t also responded to Hurricane Hugo, which caused major damage in the Virgin Islands and coast of the Carolinas, and to the Loma Prieta Earthquake in California. The 1990s brought even costlier natural disasters. Between 1992 and 1995 the Corps performed major repair and rehabilitation work in the wake of Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki, record flooding on the Mississippi and Missouri rivers, and the Northridge earthquake in California.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

xotoxi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.
> ...



You might want to take it up with the President since he is the one who has intoned that he HAS directed everything since day 1.



> "Every key decision and action they take must be approved by us in advance," he said. "I've designated [U.S. Coast Guard] Adm. Thad Allen, who has nearly four decades of experience responding to such disasters, as the national incident commander. And if he orders BP to do something to respond to this disaster, they are legally bound to do it."


  President Obama as quoted here:  Gulf Oil Spill: Obama Says Fed Gov't in Charge of Efforts to Contain Leak, Not BP - ABC News

And if he's so intent on slapping lawyers on BP, then he could just as easily hire the boats and crews himself (in the name of the U.S., that is) and then send the bill to BP as a component part of whatever "damages" he seems to think he will extract from them.

But back to YOUR question, XO.  The PRESIDENT himself made the claim.  So if BP is legally obligated to "Do it" if ordered, and the President has been fully in charge since day one, then the PRESIDENT must have been the one to decide NOT to hire all those fishermen and their boats.  

It's either that or the President wasn't being honest.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

xotoxi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.
> ...


No...but BP pretty much did that anyway.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

Ravi said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...




Bullshit.  BP did nothing like that at all.  

And if the President doesn't have the authority to do it (which is a reasonable suggestion, by the way) then the President lied.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Help plug the fucking hole.
> 
> 
> U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History
> ...




None of that seems to say the Corp is prepared or knows anything about plugging an oil spill in 5K feet of water.  The Corp does all of it's work on land and in the waterways that flow through the land.  Nothing I read in your link said they had any experience or expertise at capping an deep water oil spill.  I don't thinkk even Navy divers can dive that deep.

Want to try again?


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...




Were you one of those biaching about the POTUS limiting compensation to executives of banks that took bailout money?


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Clearly, twerp, you misunderstood my post.  So, I shall deign to set your misguided ass straight.  Try to pay attention this time.

(A) the President doesn't have any fucking right to order BP to hire boats to conduct clean up operations.

(B) the President's CLAIM to the effect that he had such power and authority is bullshit, but that never seems to stop this President from saying such idiotic things anyway.

(C) I didn't bitch or biatch about it, but I am quite content in asserting that the freakin' President of the United States has ZERO Constitutional authority to tell execs in private companies what they can or cannot make.  And if you WANT to make the claim that by accepting bailout funds  the rules are somehow changed, then you are obliged to put that string in the papers that arranged for the banks to get the bailout funds.

(D) I opposed bailouts, too.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...


They've been hiring the fisherman. Not sure where you get your news, prolly from mal's ass.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Bullshit.  They have NOT been hiring the fisherman in any significant numbers.  To the extent they are doing any hiring at long last, that is the departure from their record to date.  

I know where you get your news.  The biased and distorted likes of the Huffy Post or other liberoidal outlets with no concern for truth.  In that regard, you are right in step with them.

Stop obsessing over Mal's ass.  He's a married man for Pete's sake.  Your obsession is really kind of off-putting.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

FEATURE-Local fishermen unhappy at BP Gulf spill jobs offers | Reuters


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

xotoxi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > MAYBE he should have ordered the Oil Company (BP) to hire the soon to be unemployed fisherman to place the floating booms in the waters to prevent as much of the SPREAD of the oil as possible to minimize the natural calamity of it making landfall.
> ...



This is simply another shining example of certain RW posters looking for a way to condemn Obama NO. MATTER. WHAT. HE. DOES.   It's getting more and more transparent.   I love showing this to my friends who are on the fence politically.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Yeah, I thought it was you........


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> Help plug the fucking hole.
> 
> 
> U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Brief History
> ...



Not an oilfield or deep water.    Yes, they most certainly can help with clean up....but explain their qualifications in STOPPING the oil leak.   TIA


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...




Yeah, you still can't be honest.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...


Not sure why you think they could employee each and every fisherman...and their boats all at the same time. But of course, you're so brilliant I'm sure you imagine that anyone with a boat is competent to crowd the seas and suck up oil.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Nice effort at strawman, *ravi*ng-bullshitartist.  Please feel obligated to quote the post (with link) where I suggested anything about employing EVERY fisherman.  

And I realize YOU don't know what they could do.  Nevertheless, you not knowing something is not the same as that thing not being possible.

I am quite sure that fisherman would have to get some training.  That would be part and parcel of hiring them and their boats.  If this concept is truly that difficult for you to grasp (as it seems to be) then you'd be better advised not to bother trying to post on algore's interwebz.


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

bodecea said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...


The problem is that he has done NOTHING, other than make speeches of how enraged he is.


----------



## bodecea (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...




Gee...and believing that to be true, I suppose Obama has lost your vote in 2012.    How sad.


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



Heh heh, glad I got to see Lie's little litany of factoids. (A) and (B) are way off:

Oil Pollution Act Overview | Emergency Management | US EPA


> The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) has been expanded in a three-tiered approach: *the Federal government is required to direct all public and private response efforts for certain types of spill events*; Area Committees -- composed of federal, state, and local government officials -- must develop detailed, location-specific Area Contingency Plans; and owners or operators of vessels and certain facilities that pose a serious threat to the environment must prepare their own Facility Response Plans.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jun 3, 2010)

sangha said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...




Says the moron who praised Madeline for her "serious" admonition to Obama to launch a criminal investigation for an accident, rather than actually providing any assistance for a disaster which took place in FEDERAL WATERS. 

BTW, Madeline also thinks it would have been okay to burn down a house with the baby Hitler in it, regardless of who else was in the house. 

You were saying about no morals, no principles?

Wingnut.


----------



## The Rabbi (Jun 3, 2010)

bodecea said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Your reading comprehension is on a par with your logic skills.  Abysmal.
Some things BP should be left to do. Other things the U.S. gov't can help with.
But Obama isn't doing either fo those.  He is talking about criminal indictments.  He is not teaming up with the industry to help get resources to the problem.  He is trying to make political hay out of the situation.  Obama doesn't give a shit about BP, oil, the Gulf Coast, or anything else.  Obama cares about politics and beating his enemies and winning.
Obama: The President of Fuck You.


----------



## Rozman (Jun 3, 2010)

Wait I thought he was focused like a laser from day one.Just like he was focused on the economy,employment,energy,immigration,education.Oh boy are we in trouble.


----------



## Samson (Jun 3, 2010)

Rozman said:


> Wait I thought he was focused like a laser from day one.Just like he was focused on the economy,employment,energy,immigration,education.Oh boy are we in trouble.




Stop being picky.

The point is that he is focused......on something......


----------



## Ravi (Jun 3, 2010)

Liability said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...


You said they weren't hiring fishermen. Your link, dated May 7, already had whining by fishermen that weren't hiring. Therefore, they were hiring fishermen.


----------



## Liability (Jun 3, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


so now it is either your reading comprehension disability or your honesty that is in issue.

What I DENIED was that the President had ordered BP to hire the fishermen and I suggested that maybe that's what he should do since he had falsely CLAIMED to have the authority to order BP to do things and that they would be thus obligated to do it.

YOU then suggested that this was what BP _was already doing_, which _is_ bullshit.  They had hired SOME -- but not many -- and some of the boats and fishermen weren't even locals.   But with a spill that massive, what BP OUGHT to have done (on its own) was to hire virtually every available fisherman with a large enough boat, then train them, provide them with required equipment, and then get them out there to try to prevent the spreading of the oil.

And IF as the President bogus-ly claimed HE (or him via a subordinate) had the authority to order BP to do stuff and then BP would be obligated to DO IT, then the PRESIDENT or his subordinate SHOULD have so directed BP.  THAT was never done, either.

The NCP to which Magoo alludes is NOT the same thing she seems to think it is.  The actual OIL POLLUTION ACT (not the "plan") is set forth HERE:  United States Code: Browse Titles Page

A careful review of that miasma does NOT reveal that the President has the authority he claimed to have.  The provisions of the NCP, by contrast, are not legislated but Administratively drafted rules and regulations.   It is a verbose mess.   It can be found HERE:

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations:

 It is absolutely true that a reading of its provisions might constitute the support for the President's contentions about the scope of his (and the Admiral's) authority. It is not clear to me that the regulatory authority for such rule making isn't a violation of the constitution, but that's a question for another day.

As far as my quick first perusal of the NCA leads me, the most relevant provision seems to be this one:



> § 300.305   Phase IIPreliminary assessment and initiation of action.
> top
> 
> (a) The OSC is responsible for promptly initiating a preliminary assessment.
> ...


 Electronic Code of Federal Regulations:


----------



## CMike (Jun 3, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Help plug the fucking hole.
> ...


It says that the one of the Corps jobs is to fight oil spills.

What has Obama directed the Army Corp of Engineers to do?

Nothing

Zippo

Nada

However, in his defense, Obama did take time from one of his vacations to say that he was outraged.


----------



## mudwhistle (Jun 3, 2010)

CMike said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Actually...Obama did do something. 

His EPA stood in the way of requests by local officials to build berms to prevent the oil from reaching wetlands and beaches. 

They had to wait on the government for a study on the environmental effects of said berms. They're still waiting.

So Obama's Administration stood in the way of anything that would have minimized the damage to wildlife.

That's alot.


----------



## my2¢ (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



My criticism of Obama on this issue is more of style, not substance.  I think he's right in his attitude about going after BP.  But that's not what I want to hear about right now.  At this point it isn't so much a concern about the financial responsibility but rather on first getting the situation itself fixed.  It sort of reminds me a little bit of Jimmy Carter talking about freezing Iranian assets duing the hostage situation.  

I'm all for holding BP financially responsible, but we got a job here that's proven itself bigger than BP's capabilities and I want more of a "let's get to work on this together" attitude from Obama.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)

Liability said:


> yada yada yada


What did Obama say exactly to lead you to believe he was in charge of BP?


----------



## editec (Jun 4, 2010)

The FEDs responded in a timely fashion.

The army corps of engineers aren't equpped to deal with this leak.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.

As I predicted, no one has a clue. They just want a photo-op. According to the wingnuts, Obamas' terrible failing is that he didn't immeditately put his boots on and get his picture taken on an oil stained beach in LA (even though it took a month before the oil reached the shore)


----------



## mudwhistle (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> 
> As I predicted, no one has a clue. They just want a photo-op. According to the wingnuts, Obamas' terrible failing is that he didn't immeditately put his boots on and get his picture taken on an oil stained beach in LA (even though it took a month before the oil reached the shore)



The EPA dragged their feet.

Requests were sent to the White House to allow them to try various methods to prevent oil from hitting the beaches.....but the were ignored until it was way too late.

One would think that the Obama Administration wanted to maximize the damage for the photographic effect it would get.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Jun 4, 2010)

[youtube]gKRS-J4BdbU&feature[/youtube]


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama did zero
> ...



WOW!! What stupid logic. 

And Bush was critized for it. So you would think you and Obama would be smart enough to learn from others mistakes, but hey no hope, no change, just the same old Washington politics.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

mudwhistle said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> ...



*And another hater who has no idea about what to do about the problem besides whine*

Well, let's take a look at what bush did in response to requests for help dealing with Katrina

Think Progress  KATRINA TIMELINE

August 27

*Friday, August 26GOV. KATHLEEN BLANCO DECLARES STATE OF EMERGENCY IN LOUISIANA [Office of the Governor]*

GULF COAST STATES REQUEST TROOP ASSISTANCE FROM PENTAGON: At a 9/1 press conference, Lt. Gen. Russel HonorÃ©, commander, Joint Task Force Katrina, said that the Gulf States began the process of requesting additional forces on Friday, 8/26. [DOD]

LOUISIANA NATIONAL GUARD REQUESTS 700 BUSES FROM FEMA FOR EVACUATIONS: FEMA sends only 100 buses. [Boston Globe]


August 29

MORNING &#8212; BUSH SHARES BIRTHDAY CAKE PHOTO-OP WITH SEN. JOHN MCCAIN [White House

LATE MORNING &#8212; LEVEE BREACHED: &#8220;A large section of the vital 17th Street Canal levee, where it connects to the brand new &#8216;hurricane proof&#8217; Old Hammond Highway bridge, gave way late Monday morning in Bucktown after Katrina&#8217;s fiercest winds were well north.&#8221; [Times-Picayune]
11AM CDT &#8212; BUSH VISITS ARIZONA RESORT TO PROMOTE MEDICARE DRUG BENEFIT: &#8220;This new bill I signed says, if you&#8217;re a senior and you like the way things are today, you&#8217;re in good shape, don&#8217;t change. But, by the way, there&#8217;s a lot of different options for you. And we&#8217;re here to talk about what that means to our seniors.&#8221; [White House]
4:30PM CDT &#8212; BUSH TRAVELS TO CALIFORNIA SENIOR CENTER TO DISCUSS MEDICARE DRUG BENEFIT: &#8220;We&#8217;ve got some folks up here who are concerned about their Social Security or Medicare. Joan Geist is with us. &#8230; I could tell &#8212; she was looking at me when I first walked in the room to meet her, she was wondering whether or not old George W. is going to take away her Social Security check.&#8221; [White House]
8PM CDT &#8212; RUMSFELD ATTENDS SAN DIEGO PADRES BASEBALL GAME: Rumsfeld &#8220;joined Padres President John Moores in the owner&#8217;s box&#8230;at Petco Park.&#8221; [Editor & Publisher]
*8PM CDT &#8212; GOV. BLANCO AGAIN REQUESTS ASSISTANCE FROM BUSH: &#8220;Mr. President, we need your help. We need everything you&#8217;ve got.&#8221; [Newsweek]*
LATE PM &#8212; BUSH GOES TO BED WITHOUT ACTING ON BLANCO&#8217;S REQUESTS [Newsweek]

August 30

Tuesday, August 3011AM CDT &#8212; BUSH SPEAKS ON IRAQ AT NAVAL BASE CORONADO [White House]
MIDDAY &#8212; CHERTOFF CLAIMS HE FINALLY BECOMES AWARE THAT LEVEE HAS FAILED: &#8220;It was on Tuesday that the levee&#8211;may have been overnight Monday to Tuesday&#8211;that the levee started to break. And it was midday Tuesday that I became aware of the fact that there was no possibility of plugging the gap and that essentially the lake was going to start to drain into the city.&#8221; But later reports note that the Bush administration learned of the levee breach on Aug. 29. [Meet the Press, 9/4/05; AP]
PENTAGON CLAIMS THERE ARE ENOUGH NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS IN REGION: &#8220;Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said the states have adequate National Guard units to handle the hurricane needs.&#8221; [WWL-TV]
MASS LOOTING REPORTED, SECURITY SHORTAGE CITED: &#8220;The looting is out of control. The French Quarter has been attacked,&#8221; Councilwoman Jackie Clarkson said. &#8220;We&#8217;re using exhausted, scarce police to control looting when they should be used for search and rescue while we still have people on rooftops.&#8221; [AP]
U.S.S. BATAAN SITS OFF SHORE, VIRTUALLY UNUSED: &#8220;The USS Bataan, a 844-foot ship designed to dispatch Marines in amphibious assaults, has helicopters, doctors, hospital beds, food and water. It also can make its own water, up to 100,000 gallons a day. And it just happened to be in the Gulf of Mexico when Katrina came roaring ashore. The Bataan rode out the storm and then followed it toward shore, awaiting relief orders. Helicopter pilots flying from its deck were some of the first to begin plucking stranded New Orleans residents. But now the Bataan&#8217;s hospital facilities, including six operating rooms and beds for 600 patients, are empty.&#8221; [Chicago Tribune]

*2PM CDT &#8212; PRESIDENT BUSH PLAYS GUITAR WITH COUNTRY SINGER MARK WILLIS [AP]
BUSH RETURNS TO CRAWFORD FOR FINAL NIGHT OF VACATION [AP]*
August 31

1:45AM CDT &#8212; FEMA REQUESTS AMBULANCES THAT DO NOT EXIST: &#8220;Almost 18 hours later, [FEMA] canceled the request for the ambulances because it turned out, as one FEMA employee put it, &#8216;the DOT doesn&#8217;t do ambulances.&#8217;&#8221; [Wall Street Journal]

*EARLY AM &#8212; BLANCO AGAIN TRIES TO REQUEST HELP FROM BUSH: &#8220;She was transferred around the White House for a while until she ended up on the phone with Fran Townsend, the president&#8217;s Homeland Security adviser, who tried to reassure her but did not have many specifics. Hours later, Blanco called back and insisted on speaking to the president. When he came on the line, the governor recalled, &#8220;I just asked him for help, &#8216;whatever you have&#8217;.&#8221; She asked for 40,000 troops.&#8221; [Newsweek]*
7PM CDT &#8212; CONDOLEEZZA RICE TAKES IN A BROADWAY SHOW: &#8220;On Wednesday night, Secretary Rice was booed by some audience members at &#8216;Spamalot!, the Monty Python musical at the Shubert, when the lights went up after the performance.&#8221; [New York Post, 9/2/05]

Thursday, September 1

CONDOLEEZZA RICE VISITS U.S. OPEN: &#8220;Rice, [in New York] on three days&#8217; vacation to shop and see the U.S. Open, hitting some balls with retired champ Monica Seles at the Indoor Tennis Club at Grand Central.&#8221; [New York Post]
*STILL NO COMMAND AND CONTROL ESTABLISHED: Terry Ebbert, New Orleans Homeland Security Director: &#8220;This is a national emergency. This is a national disgrace. FEMA has been here three days, yet there is no command and control. We can send massive amounts of aid to tsunami victims, but we can&#8217;t bail out the city of New Orleans.&#8221; [Fox News]*
CONDOLEEZZA RICE GOES SHOE SHOPPING: &#8220;Just moments ago at the Ferragamo on 5th Avenue, Condoleeza Rice was seen spending several thousands of dollars on some nice, new shoes (we&#8217;ve confirmed this, so her new heels will surely get coverage from the WaPo&#8217;s Robin Givhan). A fellow shopper, unable to fathom the absurdity of Rice&#8217;s timing, went up to the Secretary and reportedly shouted, &#8216;How dare you shop for shoes while thousands are dying and homeless!&#8217;&#8221; [Gawker

Friday, September 2

10:35AM CDT &#8212; BUSH PRAISES MICHAEL BROWN: &#8220;Brownie, you&#8217;re doing a heck of a job.&#8221; [White House, 9/2/05]
12PM CDT &#8212; BUSH &#8220;SATISFIED WITH THE RESPONSE&#8221;: &#8220;I am satisfied with the response. I am not satisfied with all the results.&#8221; [AP]
PM &#8212; FEMA&#8217;S NO. 2 OFFICIAL &#8220;IMPRESSED&#8221; WITH GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: &#8220;I am actually very impressed with the mobilization of man and machine to help our friends in this unfortunate area&#8230;.I think it&#8217;s one of the most impressive search-and-rescue operations this country has ever conducted domestically.&#8221; [Time]

Saturday, September 3

*SENIOR BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL LIES TO WASHINGTON POST, CLAIMS GOV. BLANCO NEVER DECLARED STATE OF EMERGENCY: The Post reported in their Sunday edition &#8220;As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.&#8221; They were forced to issue a correction hours later. [Washington Post, 9/4/05]*
9AM CDT &#8212; BUSH BLAMES STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS: &#8220;[T]he magnitude of responding to a crisis over a disaster area that is larger than the size of Great Britain has created tremendous problems that have strained state and local capabilities. The result is that many of our citizens simply are not getting the help they need.&#8221; [White House, 9/3/05]
8:05PM CDT &#8212; FEMA FINALIZES BUS REQUEST: &#8220;FEMA ended up modifying the number of buses it thought it needed to get the job done, until it settled on a final request of 1,335 buses at 8:05 p.m. on Sept. 3. The buses, though, trickled into New Orleans, with only a dozen or so arriving the first day.&#8221; [Wall Street Journal, 9/13/05[/quote]


----------



## Samson (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> 
> As I predicted, no one has a clue. They just want a photo-op. According to the wingnuts, Obamas' terrible failing is that he didn't immeditately put his boots on and get his picture taken on an oil stained beach in LA (even though it took a month before the oil reached the shore)



Wingnuts, _Wingnuts_, *Wingnuts!!!*

I knew you'd say it again.


----------



## JW Frogen (Jun 4, 2010)

With out wingnuts planes can't fly.

Just saying.


----------



## Samson (Jun 4, 2010)

JW Frogen said:


> With out wingnuts planes can't fly.
> 
> Just saying.





_You're a pilot?_


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Samson said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> ...



Stick around. I'll be here all week!!

And don't forget to tip your waitress


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...


[/QUOTE]

Not sure what Bush's reaction to Katrina but that seems to be the theme with you.
  Can't figure out how Bush's mistakes make it okay for Obama's mistakes. I again would think those would learn by others mistakes.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Papageorgio said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > mudwhistle said:
> ...



Not sure what Bush's reaction to Katrina but that seems to be the theme with you.
  Can't figure out how Bush's mistakes make it okay for Obama's mistakes. I again would think those would learn by others mistakes.[/QUOTE]

It shows your hypocrisy for blaming Obama for what bush did - ignoring the problem


----------



## CMike (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> 
> As I predicted, no one has a clue. They just want a photo-op. According to the wingnuts, Obamas' terrible failing is that he didn't immeditately put his boots on and get his picture taken on an oil stained beach in LA (even though it took a month before the oil reached the shore)



I did. Mobilize the Corp of engineers whose job it is to deal with oil leaks.

He can give his bs speeches of how enraged he is  after the crises has been resolved.


----------



## CMike (Jun 4, 2010)

editec said:


> The FEDs responded in a timely fashion.
> 
> The army corps of engineers aren't equpped to deal with this leak.


They responded. How?


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

CMike said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> ...



The Corps of Engineers has nothing to do with oil leaks, idiot


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

CMike said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > The FEDs responded in a timely fashion.
> ...



The Coast Guard reponded and was at the scene within three hours.

It bush days to get the feds on the scene when Katrina hit NO.


----------



## CMike (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...


What did they do to stop or clean up the leak?


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> So far, no one has been able to name one single thing Obama didn't do that would have helped reduce the damage.
> 
> As I predicted, no one has a clue. They just want a photo-op. According to the wingnuts, Obamas' terrible failing is that he didn't immeditately put his boots on and get his picture taken on an oil stained beach in LA (even though it took a month before the oil reached the shore)



They're confused and it goes all the way back to Hurrican katrina.  They think people were pizzed at W because he didn't get down there until well after the hurricane had made landfall.  NOT TRUE!  The nation was pizzed at W for not having FEMA ready to help those people as soon as the storm was out of the way.  And by help, we meant getting them ice and water......rescuing those trapped by floods.......stopping the local police from shooting people who were just trying to survive.......

I don't think anyone cared whether or not W went to the gulf coast.  Just like now.  It was the wingnuts and the GOP yelling that Obama hadn't been to the gulf coast.  That didn't bother me because he sent all of the resources that the experts felt would help.  That's more important that him going there because he personally knows zip about offshore oil drilling from a technical POV.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

CMike said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Do you want the federal goverment to create a deep sea oil drilling emergency management agency?  That is the only way the federal government under ANY president would be able to do what you're wanting them to do.......go in and stop the leak themselves.  Yeah, that would be a real good use of taxpayer money.  That would be the best job in the world.  They would rehearse for years and years in the hope that there would be another deep sea oil disaster.  As a taxpayer, I think that capability should be left up to the oil industry to create/possess.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Of course it's BP's responsibility to clean up the mess and stop the leak.

Only an idiot would think otherwise

That's why the idiot "small government" conservatives are the ones crying that the nanny state isnt bringing them a govt-paid binky


----------



## Samson (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Do you want the federal goverment to create a deep sea oil drilling emergency management agency?  That is the only way the federal government under ANY president would be able to do what you're wanting them to do.......go in and stop the leak themselves.  Yeah, that would be a real good use of taxpayer money.  That would be the best job in the world.  They would rehearse for years and years in the hope that there would be another deep sea oil disaster.  As a taxpayer, I think that capability should be left up to the oil industry to create/possess.



The MMS already is supposed to do this, and ALREADY collects $Billions to fund it, but chooses to only use about $6 million for oil spill emergency management.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

More than 100 posts, and no one has any realistic suggestions besides having Obama put his boots on and getting his picture taken


----------



## MaggieMae (Jun 4, 2010)

editec said:


> The FEDs responded in a timely fashion.
> 
> The army corps of engineers aren't equpped to deal with this leak.



All the relevant agencies have responded in a timely *AND LEGAL *fashion, despite Lie's arduous attempt to find loopholes in the law to boost his stupid contentions.



> [Admiral Thad]Allen said that every available skimmer in the nation has been called into action, but not at the expense of oil operations in other parts of the country. *Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, there are operations along the Texas Coast and Mississippi River which must have the capability of responding to a spill.* Its all hands on deck, he said. If we were to remove that, we would have to grant them a waiver and take a risk position.



Read more: Coast Guard's Allen says more boats to be deployed for booms, skimming - Oil Spill - SunHerald.com


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

Samson said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > Do you want the federal goverment to create a deep sea oil drilling emergency management agency?  That is the only way the federal government under ANY president would be able to do what you're wanting them to do.......go in and stop the leak themselves.  Yeah, that would be a real good use of taxpayer money.  That would be the best job in the world.  They would rehearse for years and years in the hope that there would be another deep sea oil disaster.  As a taxpayer, I think that capability should be left up to the oil industry to create/possess.
> ...



ACtually, it's not. 




> The Minerals Management Service (MMS), a bureau in the U.S. Department of the Interior, is the Federal agency that manages the nation's natural gas, oil and other mineral resources on the outer continental shelf (OCS). The agency also collects, accounts for and disburses an average of $13.7 billion per year in revenues from Federal offshore mineral leases and from onshore mineral leases on Federal and American Indian lands. The program is national in scope and is headquartered in Washington, D.C.




The money they collect is passed on to the treasury.  Maybe they SHOULD have the responsiblity for deep water oil disaster response, but as of right now,, they don't.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

About all he realistically could have done more than he has done is act like he gives a fuck, beyond campaigning that is. I'm sorry but when a large portion of our country is suffering the President shouldn't be on vacation, he shouldn't be sitting at $10K a plate party dinners, he shouldn't be watching his wife be serenaded by Paul McCartney, etc etc. Would his presence of made a difference to how much oil is leaking? No. Could he have swam down there and plugged the   leak?No. BUt what kind of signal does it send when he's on the golf course when the governor of LA is BEGGING for help?


Time to face facts, all this clown cared about was getting the job.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



You are correct. BP is responsible, and not just financially, for plugging the leak. MMS has responsibility for overseeing the effort.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> About all he realistically could have done more than he has done is act like he gives a fuck, beyond campaigning that is. I'm sorry but when a large portion of our country is suffering the President shouldn't be on vacation, he shouldn't be sitting at $10K a plate party dinners, he shouldn't be watching his wife be serenaded by Paul McCartney, etc etc. Would his presence of made a difference to how much oil is leaking? No. Could he have swam down there and plugged the   leak?No. BUt what kind of signal does it send when he's on the golf course when the governor of LA is BEGGING for help?
> 
> 
> Time to face facts, all this clown cared about was getting the job.



When people were drowning in NO, bush was on vacation. He didn't end his vacation for days. 

Condie Rice went to see B'way show and shopping for shoes. Bush gave speeches at fundraisers, and played guitar with a famous country star.

Guess what? Life goes on. That's not a bad message


----------



## Dr.House (Jun 4, 2010)

43 outpaced 44's Gulf trips | POLITICO 44


Maybe Barry's planning more trips OTV (other than vacations)....


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Dr.House said:


> 43 outpaced 44's Gulf trips | POLITICO 44
> 
> 
> Maybe Barry's planning more trips OTV (other than vacations)....



Like I've said from the very beginning, the wingnuts big concern is with photo ops.

It's understandable. After 8 years of bush , they think that photo ops are the only thing a president does well.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > About all he realistically could have done more than he has done is act like he gives a fuck, beyond campaigning that is. I'm sorry but when a large portion of our country is suffering the President shouldn't be on vacation, he shouldn't be sitting at $10K a plate party dinners, he shouldn't be watching his wife be serenaded by Paul McCartney, etc etc. Would his presence of made a difference to how much oil is leaking? No. Could he have swam down there and plugged the   leak?No. BUt what kind of signal does it send when he's on the golf course when the governor of LA is BEGGING for help?
> ...




Umm Bush was boots on the ground in NO the moment the SS pronounced it safe. Seven days. Not that is relevant because Obama swore he'd do things differently in Washington. 

This doesn't even address the fact that he didn't even send the people in Tenn a condolence letter.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Like I've said over and over; Conservatives don't care about the cleanup; they're only concerned about photo ops

They like to see men dress up in costumes more than Liberace did


----------



## Dr.House (Jun 4, 2010)

Barry loves the photo ops - when they're about *him*...

He'll be judged by his response or lack thereof to the crisis, and rightly so...


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...




Say what? Are you aware that there were riots going on and people running around shooting at each other? Yes, definitely Bush should have ignored the advice of the military , LEO, and his SS and went in on day one with no protection. 

Dubya had his flaws, and I would never call him a great President, but to compare his reaction to Katrina with this President's complete lack of apathy is ridiculous.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Pronounced it safe? How silly. It was never not safe except during the actual flood.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



You can't be serious?


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> About all he realistically could have done more than he has done is act like he gives a fuck, beyond campaigning that is. I'm sorry but when a large portion of our country is suffering the President shouldn't be on vacation, he shouldn't be sitting at $10K a plate party dinners, he shouldn't be watching his wife be serenaded by Paul McCartney, etc etc. Would his presence of made a difference to how much oil is leaking? No. Could he have swam down there and plugged the   leak?No. BUt what kind of signal does it send when he's on the golf course when the governor of LA is BEGGING for help?
> 
> 
> Time to face facts, all this clown cared about was getting the job.



Desptie all you mention, the governor of LA got the help he asked for.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Like I've said over and over; Conservatives don't care about the cleanup; they're only concerned about photo ops.




Wait... Obama is conservative?


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > About all he realistically could have done more than he has done is act like he gives a fuck, beyond campaigning that is. I'm sorry but when a large portion of our country is suffering the President shouldn't be on vacation, he shouldn't be sitting at $10K a plate party dinners, he shouldn't be watching his wife be serenaded by Paul McCartney, etc etc. Would his presence of made a difference to how much oil is leaking? No. Could he have swam down there and plugged the   leak?No. BUt what kind of signal does it send when he's on the golf course when the governor of LA is BEGGING for help?
> ...



40 days later


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Yes, I am serious.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



There were no riots nor people 'running' around shooting.  There were a couple of isolated shooting incidents which were no where near anywhere the POTUS whould have gone.

You choose to be blind in this instance.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Then you're wrong. Simple googling will show plenty of riots, looters, gun shots, etc etc in the days following Katrina, not exactly a situation the Secret Service is anxious to allow a President into.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



They NEVER got the help they asked for after Katrina.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



The fact that you're uninformed doesn't change the realilty on the ground.  Ask the Governor of Tennessee.


Tennessee Governor &#8220;very pleased&#8221; with response to flooding by Obama administration  Row 2, Seat 4





> The Tennessee governor says no one in his state feels "slighted" by the fact the president has not yet been down to assess the damage first hand. "He has a lot on his plate, and we're working through these things with FEMA and the Red Cross," said Bredesen. "But he's welcome to come any time he wants," as is Secretary Napolitano, to whom Bredesen has also extended an invitation, and she's accepted - the secretary will head to Tennessee Saturday to visit Nashville and the surrounding areas.




You need to understand that imagery is nice, but real help is better.  If you don't, apparently the people in Tennessee do.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



And again, the wingnuts prove that they only care about photo ops. That's why the conjob obsesses over how quickly bush got his picture taken.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



Really? the city just magically rebuilt itself?


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



You can't be so ignorant that you've never heard of the Secret Service?

Oh wait!!! You're a conservative. Of course you can be that ignorant


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Actually, if you google 'Katrina Riots', you don't get any of that.  You get a story about looters (which isn't a riot), and you get a story about prisoners abandoned by guards rioting inside the prison.  If you google 'Katrina shooting' you find the story of the Gretna police shooting people fleeing from NO.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Like I've said over and over; Conservatives don't care about the cleanup; they're only concerned about photo ops.
> ...



Conservatives love the "I'm rubber, you're glue" argument. It's their most sophisticated idea.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Even if there were actual riots, only an idiotic conjob would think the SS would land POTUS in the middle of a riot. And only a moron would think the SS can't handle a looter and can't secure an area


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> And again, the wingnuts prove that they only care about photo ops. That's why the conjob obsesses over how quickly bush got his picture taken.



I dunno, Obama sure presented a nice photo op on the beach, bending down to touch the sand... or maybe he was just seeing whether or not he could perform a 'lay on hands' miracle.  He certainly has enough worshippers to qualify as a deity.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives love the "I'm rubber, you're glue" argument. It's their most sophisticated idea.
> ...


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Eric said:
> ...


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...




You're right, they didn't land him in the middle of a riot, that's why they waited 7 days to make sure it was safe. Seven days by the way is pretty damned fast considering how much prep time the Secret Service normally gives to anywhere the President is going to be.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > It looks like "I'm rubber, you're glue" is all  you got.
> ...


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Eric said:
> ...


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > And again, the wingnuts prove that they only care about photo ops. That's why the conjob obsesses over how quickly bush got his picture taken.
> ...



That was only AFTER the right wingnuts leaders (Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter) had whipped their minions into a frenzy.  So he went down there to placate the mentally bankrupt.  And it appears to have worked.  Thinking Americans knew that his going there wouldn't help the situation any.  Actually, he probably was just in the way.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Eric said:
> ...


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> That always makes me giggle to. I especially like their tactic of name calling then recoiling in horror if someone calls them a name.



I know - it is pathetic.  I mean, i consider myself a true liberal, but when I examine the other 99% of those who call themselves the same I simply shake my head and smile.  




beowolfe said:


> That was only AFTER the right wingnuts leaders (Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter) had whipped their minions into a frenzy.  So he went down there to placate the mentally bankrupt.  And it appears to have worked.  Thinking Americans knew that his going there wouldn't help the situation any.  Actually, he probably was just in the way.



You mean right wingers like James Carville?  How about all those other LEFT WING politicians and columnists that echo the very same thing?

You need to look beyond your bias lenses.


P.S.

I'm also a liberal who voted for Obama (albeit I'm now having buyer's remorse)... and though I'm not that hard on him over the spill, I see a LOT of hypocrisy coming from the "Bush causes hurricanes" Left-wing crowd.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > That always makes me giggle to. I especially like their tactic of name calling then recoiling in horror if someone calls them a name.
> ...




I don't guess I have a classification. I believe in following the CON and am generally conservative, but on the other hand I recognize that not everything is black and white and just being a hard ass stingy conservative is to harm the greater good.

I am often lambasted by conservatives on such issues as gays in the military, welfare, and other similar issues.  Damn being conservative doesn't have to mean not having any compassion no more than being liberal has to mean not having any common sense.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


That must mean Geraldo Rivera and all the other press there were in danger...they were not.

Or that Bush is a coward.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > And again, the wingnuts prove that they only care about photo ops. That's why the conjob obsesses over how quickly bush got his picture taken.
> ...



So now he's wrong to go to LA!!

You are doing a poor job of keeping your lies straight


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



There were no riots, idiot!


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Or that the Secret Service takes the President's safety a little more seriously than FoxNews takes Rivera's. Hint, they do...


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> I don't guess I have a classification. I believe in following the CON and am generally conservative, but on the other hand I recognize that not everything is black and white and just being a hard ass stingy conservative is to harm the greater good.
> 
> I am often lambasted by conservatives on such issues as gays in the military, welfare, and other similar issues.  *Damn being conservative doesn't have to mean not having any compassion no more than being liberal has to mean not having any common sense*.



*Emphasis *mine.


You hit the nail on the head, mate.    That is exactly it - though I will tell you, being a liberal, there are for less sympathetic, open-minded and tolerant people on the left than on the right - that comes from personal experience.  Heck, take a look at any of these threads around here... I bet the first name-calling or flaming came from someone on the Left.  Sad, but true.


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > That always makes me giggle to. I especially like their tactic of name calling then recoiling in horror if someone calls them a name.
> ...



Yeah, right. I believe you.

I beleive you said that Obama should take more photo ops, and then you criticized him for going to a photo ops.

You're obviously sincere


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> So now he's wrong to go to LA!!
> 
> You are doing a poor job of keeping your lies straight





Really?  Would you care to point out where I lied?  

I'm waiting...


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

Sangha....  I'm still waiting.....


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > I don't guess I have a classification. I believe in following the CON and am generally conservative, but on the other hand I recognize that not everything is black and white and just being a hard ass stingy conservative is to harm the greater good.
> ...



it is true, and sadly they want to then act like the right started it all. I mean look at the absolute hate that was thrown Dubya's way, now some of that may have been deserved some not, but what's the first thing you hear if you say ANYTHING about Obama ? Racist................... Of course it doesn't help that some supposed conservatives are running around questioning his citizenship and calling him a ****** and such............

Just goes to show stupidity and ignorance don't know left from right.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Yeah, right. I believe you.
> 
> I beleive you said that Obama should take more photo ops, and then you criticized him for going to a photo ops.
> 
> You're obviously sincere




Uh, huh?

First, I never said Obama should take more photo ops - where the heck did you imagine that at?  

Second, I didn't criticize Obama - I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your bashing Republican/conservative photo ops.



P.S.


Still waiting on proof of where I "lied".


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...




Such bullshit.

It doesn't even matter if he went there. FEMA wasn't doing their job and helping the people that needed help...you know, the ones LIVING in that, what you pretend to be, very dangerous place.

Conhog is an excellent name for you, it's almost like call yourself fathead.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > it is true, and sadly they want to then act like the right started it all.
> ...


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Conhog is an excellent name for you, it's almost like call yourself fathead.





Ahhhh....and right on cue, a PERFECT example of what I was talking about when it comes to Leftizt ugliness.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Didn't Bush I don't know FIRE the head of FEMA? Do you suppose Obama will fire anyone over t his debacle we have going on now?


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Conhog is an excellent name for you, it's almost like call yourself fathead.
> ...





It cracks me up that someone who I can disappear from my life with a simple click of the X thinks they can have any effect on me with their simplistic name calling


----------



## Zoom-boing (Jun 4, 2010)

Why was BP drilling so far out and so far down when other companies are drilling closer to shore in shallower waters?  

Why didn't BP drill relief wells along side the oil wells as a safety precaution from the get go?  Yeah I know they said that the odds of this happening were 'one in a million' but the risk is _always _there.  So why didn't they have relief wells in place all along?  

Since the explosion at least 19 controversial environmental waivers for gulf drilling projects have been issued.  BP was also issued such waivers.

Also, 





> At least six of the drilling projects that have been given waivers in the past four weeks are for waters that are deeper &#8212; and therefore more difficult and dangerous &#8212; than where Deepwater Horizon was operating. While that rig, which was drilling at a depth just shy of 5,000 feet, was classified as a deep-water operation, many of the wells in the six projects are classified as &#8220;ultra&#8221; deep water, including four new wells at over 9,100 feet.&#8221;



Despite Moratorium, Drilling Projects Move Ahead - NYTimes.com

Are these ultra deep water rigs going to have relief wells dug alongside the oil well in case an accident happens?   Will the relief wells they are digging at the BP site work?  Will they work in water twice as deep?  

As to the OP, I don't believe Obama has 'done nothing' but he certainly gives the appearance of being aloof and uncaring.  2 visits in 40 days?  He is trying to fix that _now_ . . . 45 days in?    He should have gone down to the gulf more than once or twice and shown the people his support.  Photo op?  Give me a break, he should have been down there face to face with those folks whose livelihood is being destroyed hour by hour.  He may not be able to stop or fix this problem himself but showing his support for those whose lives have been destroyed _matters_.  

As for fixing the leak . . . what difference does it make if the fix comes from private or public sector?  Stopping the leak is what matters, not who stops it.  Anyone who can come up with a viable fix should.  From what I can tell BP is doing - er, trying - everything it can to stop it.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> It cracks me up that someone who I can disappear from my life with a simple click of the X thinks they can have any effect on me with their simplistic name calling




Hey now, they call that "constructive criticism" on the Left.     I'm sure Noam Comsky would even call that "tolerance".


----------



## Ravi (Jun 4, 2010)




----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Carville wasn't crying about the president not visiting the gulf coast.  Carville was blasting what he felt would have been a more robust effort if the spill had been off Cape Cod.  He didn't want the POTUS to come to the gulf, he wanted BP to do more and faster.  Afterall, it's his home the oil is heading for, so that is understandable.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 4, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Actually, the right did start it all.......and it began well before W.  Try 1964.


----------



## Eric (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Carville wasn't crying about the president not visiting the gulf coast.
> ...


----------



## ConHog (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Eric said:
> ...



yep,all the rights fault. By the way I'll see your 1964 and raise you an 1865


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jun 4, 2010)

I don't know. Maybe he should have done something, You know, made an effort that showed he gave a darn.


----------



## txlonghorn (Jun 4, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Eric said:
> ...



WRONG AGAIN!!!!!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO1lO1CVkTE]YouTube - James Carville Slams Obama on Oil Spill: 'We're About to Die Down Here!' Stephanopoulos spins[/ame]


----------



## Sinatra (Jun 4, 2010)

txlonghorn said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...


______

Good Lord the poor flat headed liberals are getting destroyed in here!!!!

Texas - you are truly kicking ass on this day.


----------



## txlonghorn (Jun 4, 2010)

Sinatra said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



thanks...but it's not hard to do


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Eric said:


> I didn't criticize Obama - I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your bashing Republican/conservative photo ops.



If conservatives didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

Of course you criticized Obama. Do you really think anyone is going to believe that you haven't. 

And I haven't bashed photo ops from any party. I have pointed out the hypocrisy of those who criticize Obama for not doing more to fix the problem when they only thing they can think of to do is to have a photo op, which does nothing to cleanup the oil.

After all, there's nothing wrong with a president being concerned about image. In times of catastrophe, the american people want to see a leader. However, if that's what one is concerned about, then one should be honest about it. and not pretend that their concern is with cleaning up the oil.

But as this thread makes very clear, there are many wingnuts who are happy to deceive, and act as if they care about the people whose lives depend on cleaning up the oil, when all they are concerned with is perception.



> Still waiting on proof of where I "lied".



I already told you. You were OK with photo ops, until you weren't. And now, you seem to be OK with them again.

So stop trying to play words games and come up with (what you think are) witty quips and just honestly say what you mean. Are photo ops the only thing you can come up with, or do you have nothing at all? Did you come onto this thread, not because you have something to contribute to the topic being discussed? Or did your rabid partisan compel you to post attacks on the left while claiming it's the "neo-liberals" (btw, if you had a brain, you'd that neo-liberals are rightwingers) who are partisan

You're so warped, you can't even address the topic. You're so rabid, you cant offer anything but rightwing hate


----------



## sangha (Jun 4, 2010)

Avatar4321 said:


> I don't know. Maybe he should have done something, You know, made an effort that showed he gave a darn.



And that makes another conservative without a clue about what hasnt been done, but who is certain something was not done


----------



## Meister (Jun 4, 2010)

sangha said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know. Maybe he should have done something, You know, made an effort that showed he gave a darn.
> ...



Obama could have Okay'd the berms to be made to protect the shoreline without an environmental impact study.  La. asked for 24 to be made, and 17 days later the feds said 6 and they will pay for one.  Obama could have honored the requests made by La. for the boats, booms.....vacuums to help suck up the oil before it reached land.  Obama could have Okayed the chemicals to help break up the oil.  In other words, Obama could have streamlined a lot to reduce the environmental impact.

I'm not saying this spill is Obama's fault, it is on his watch though.  There is plenty of blame to be spread around and starting with BP.  
Sangha, conservatives aren't as stupid as you would think, but you seem to really be out of touch with your IQ potential


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Avatar4321 said:
> ...



Thank you for offering a serious suggestion. This ability seems rare amongst the right.

wrt the berms, they don't clean up any oil, nor do they prevent oil from reaching the shore. They merely shift the oil to a different beach. And then, if there's a storm, it not only can destroy the berm (waste of money), but they often make the problems worse.

I understand the impulse some have to "do something, ANYTHING!" in such a dire situation. However, the intent here is to reduce an environmental disaster; not create an entirely new one.

As far as requests for booms, etc.. Obama has the federal govt sending those to LA as soon as the explosion occured, so I have no knowledge of any delays in sending equipment to LA.

WRT dispersants, I don't see putting more toxic substances in the water helps. Again, we're trying to reduce a disaster, not create a new one.



> I'm not saying this spill is Obama's fault, it is on his watch though.  There is plenty of blame to be spread around and starting with BP.
> Sangha, conservatives aren't as stupid as you would think, but you seem to really be out of touch with your IQ potential



If conservatives are smarter than I think, then how come the only realistic suggestion they can come up with is "more photo ops"?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 5, 2010)

Wow Carville says jump and Obama asks how high?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Avatar4321 said:
> ...



But then he wouldn't be Obama.

He can't have Gov "Gin Doll" be the effective and competent person on the scene.


----------



## cbi0090 (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



He should have immediately recruited industry experts to sit in with BP and work on creating solutions.  Not government regulators but real subject matter experts.  There is a lot of talent in the world and he should have done everything possible to bring them in to focus on this problem.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

cbi0090 said:


> He should have immediately recruited industry experts to sit in with BP and work on creating solutions.  Not government regulators but real subject matter experts.  There is a lot of talent in the world and he should have done everything possible to bring them in to focus on this problem.



I would like to thank you for a serious suggestion. However, what you mention was done by Obama. Also, saying "he should have done everything possible" without saying what possible thing he did not do, puts you in the same position as those who complain "Obama's doing nothing" while having no clue what else could be done.


----------



## jag877 (Jun 5, 2010)

Obama should avail himself of the current technology for oil cleanup, that is:
vacuum up the floating oil into tankers/supertankers.  offload the oil/water mixture,
separate it, dump the water, load up again.  This should be down NOW.  Each day that
goes by, the harder it will be to gather up the oil before it hits land.  This technology 
was used in the Persian Gulf, with 85% success.  The longer Obama waits to make a 
decision on what to do, the harder it will be to remove the oil before it has already impacted on land.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

jag877 said:


> Obama should avail himself of the current technology for oil cleanup, that is:
> vacuum up the floating oil into tankers/supertankers.  offload the oil/water mixture,
> separate it, dump the water, load up again.  This should be down NOW.



This **is** being done now.

But thanks for making a serious suggestion


----------



## jag877 (Jun 5, 2010)

Every day this goes on without a commitment to using the best technology to capture the oil,
the more expensive it will be for everyone,  and if Obama thinks that blaming BP will direct criticism in that direction, he is wrong.   Conducting a legal witch hunt in this situation is also wrong I believe.  It will just force anyone with potential liability to refrain from trying to do anything else.    This leak may go on for years.  The priority is to use the most sensible and productive method NOW to start gathering up the oil.    they may need supertankers in place
until the well runs dry, but if sucking up this oil from the water isn't started now, it will ruin
coastlines for years to come, to say nothing of the air pollution, which is already occurring.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

jag877 said:


> Every day this goes on without a commitment to using the best technology to capture the oil,
> the more expensive it will be for everyone,  and if Obama thinks that blaming BP will direct criticism in that direction, he is wrong.   Conducting a legal witch hunt in this situation is also wrong I believe.  It will just force anyone with potential liability to refrain from trying to do anything else.    This leak may go on for years.  The priority is to use the most sensible and productive method NOW to start gathering up the oil.    they may need supertankers in place
> until the well runs dry, but if sucking up this oil from the water isn't started now, it will ruin
> coastlines for years to come, to say nothing of the air pollution, which is already occurring.



Again, the feds have already been assembling ship to get the oil out of the water. They are even training volunteers how to use their own boats to skim oil out of the water.

And it's an "investigation" not a "witch hunt". You're inability to see that it's been centuries since we've had witch hunts is a sign of your rabid partisanship. Like the other haters, you don't know what you're talking. You're sure Obama failed to do something, but all you can think of is things that Obama has done.

Go back to whining about your other mythical fears, like death panels and socialism


----------



## Valerie (Jun 5, 2010)

> *Factbox: BP preparing to seal cap on leak *
> 
> CONTAINMENT CAP
> 
> ...





Seems to me he has at least been making sure BP does everything possible...




But then again Obama should have dived down there and fixed it himself, if he really loved America!  


http://www.democraticstuff.com/common/images/products/large/BT24347-2.jpg


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> jag877 said:
> 
> 
> > Every day this goes on without a commitment to using the best technology to capture the oil,
> ...



Whatever you want to call it, it's stupid to be worried about assessing legal blame at this time, especially when BP is going on TV and saying "our mess we'll pay all valid claims." 

It's nothing more than partisan politics and YOUR inability to admit that proves your partisanship.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > jag877 said:
> ...



I see we have another soft on crime conservative who thinks criminals should be allowed to commit crimes without interference. I bet you think "Society made BP do it"

And you've got no idea about what Obama didn't do. All you can think of is "more photo ops".

Nope, you're not too partisan


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



I'm assuming that YOU DO have an issue with the adminstration trying to bribe Sestek, also?
I too, am against crime at any level.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



I see another wingnut who doesn't understand the law. (Bribes require an actual bribe. An offer to work for free is not a bribe)

But hey, knock yourself out pursuing this. I love to watch conservative dogs chase their tail


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



You have just shown what a partisan hack you are, and how things are different with "your party".  Drink another cup of kool-aid, sonny.  Looks like your chasing your own tail.


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

18 USC Section 600:

Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity




Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." 

There is nothing that says it has to be a paying job.  I see an epic fail on your part Sangha


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...




I've been on this board less than a full 24 hours and you've already proven to me that you are the stupidest person to ever manage to draw a breath.

Where did I say they should NEVER assess legal blame or decide if someone was criminally negligent is this matter? Oh, that's right I didn't . Instead I said they should wait until after they get the leak stopped and the oil cleaned up THEN run any investigations necessary.

Oh, I've also never said anything about photo ops either, so nice try to deflect.

MORON


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 5, 2010)

He should offer a Senate seat to anyone with a solution


----------



## American Horse (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama did zero
> ...



CLEAN UP THE OIL? How about stopping it?
The Corps of Engineers are collectively the foremost experts in hydrology and hydrological engineering.  The problem in the gulf is mainly a combination of hydrocarbons (oil) and hydrology.

Had THEY been commissioned to examine the problem at its beginning (along with the Coast Guard) and asked to work with local authorities to find and evaluate the best localized solutions they might have encouraged the building of sand berms in the most advantageous locations.  Anyone with experience in drainage and containment of water and contaminants understands how efficient berms and diversion structures can be to stop pollution before it is able to spread over large areas, becomes a disaster to the environment, and the clean-up becomes exponentially more costly and destructive.  Instead, when Governor Jindal of Louisiana saw the potential, and asked for those kinds of measures the President handed it over to the EPA's environmentalists to evaluate. The stalled it because his proposal needed to be fully vetted for ecological effects.

Therefore the environment is threatened because the threat to the environment takes time to evaluate, and couldn&#8217;t be done before the landfall of the oil on Louisiana's shores, and now those of Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. 

The Corps of Engineers does much more than the things you mentioned.  Besides being the best practical engineers in the world it is the foremost body in charge of designing and supervising the building of dikes all over the US.  When a small geographical area is contaminated and threatens to expand to unaffected areas, the first prescription is to raise a dike around it to contain and control the affluent. 

Raising sand berms along the beaches of Louisiana would have been inexpensive to raise and cheap to remove if and when they were no longer needed.  The President did not have the imagination, nor the decisiveness to consult with the people who did have the imagination to let it be given a full and quick evaluation; the USA Corps of Engineers.  Instead the Administration seems to be limited to bureaucratic inside the box thinking.  They seem to be only capable of reliving the Katrina disaster, as if what worked there is all they have, vis-à-vis the US Coast Guard, and of course laying about with recriminations. 

Come fall and winter, when vacationers can&#8217;t make their usual pilgrimage to Florida&#8217;s white sand beaches because they are covered with black sludge, they will tend to blame those responsible for failure to make timely decisions which would&#8217;ve prevented such a disaster.  Two years later, they plus those who&#8217;ve lost their livelihoods will vent their frustration and anger in the general election.  Florida with all its electoral votes will be crucial in that election.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Jun 5, 2010)

Not given DWH safety awards?
Done the  prescribed inspections?


----------



## Rozman (Jun 5, 2010)

A far better question.How would the media have responded if Bush was in office when this happened.I doubt very much they would have been as hands off with him as they are with this President.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job. 

If he had been hired as a CEO of a major corporation rather than elected President and performed  his job in the first 18 months at the same level as this, the Board of Directors would have fired his incompetent ass by now.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



He is  just one of many ,  he doesn't deserve  any special distinction, he's just another  progressive here to ,"Get his stupid on."


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> 18 USC Section 600:
> 
> Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
> activity
> ...



When will idiots like you learn to read. It says that the job must be "provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress"

The GOP puts out dumb arguments like this, and shmucks like you are too stupid to even read it to realize the GOP lied to you


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...




You are full of shit. Justice delayed is justice denied, and you want to delay an investigation

There's a reason why when someone is killed, the police don't hold off investigating until they clean up the blood, you moron


----------



## Vel (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > 18 USC Section 600:
> ...




Hmmm.. You might want to read that again so you don't seem clueless.
 Just sayin'


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

American Horse said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Great! Another idiot

The Corps of Engineers don't have the deep sea equipment, nor the experience to use it



> The Corps of Engineers does much more than the things you mentioned.  Besides being the best practical engineers in the world it is the foremost body in charge of designing and supervising the building of dikes all over the US.  When a small geographical area is contaminated and threatens to expand to unaffected areas, the first prescription is to raise a dike around it to contain and control the affluent.



What kind of stupidity makes you think they can build a berm around the Gulf of Mexico?

Besides, berms don't stop leaks, and berms don't cleanup any oil. They just move the oil down to the next beach, and the first storm that hits destroys them, leaving more ecological damage

The idea is to reduce the harm, not create a 2nd disaster


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job.
> 
> If he had been hired as a CEO of a major corporation rather than elected President and performed  his job in the first 18 months at the same level as this, the Board of Directors would have fired his incompetent ass by now.



Just like BP fired their CEO, right?

Oh wait.....


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > What he Really should have done was never have ran for President in the first place. THis guy has no clue how to do the job.
> ...



Please, oh please show me where I have said they shouldn't fire him.....

Oh, as for your stupid justice delayed justice denied statement. Well, that's just stupid, as is your analogy to the cops investigating a murder. Where the hell is BP going to go for the next however long it takes to get this mess cleaned up? I mean seriously, Obama has said THEY are in charge of the cleanup, so do you want the people who are in charge of this cleanup to be distracted by a civil litigation? I don't . I want them to have their full corporate attention on cleaning up this mess, then we'll worry about fines and who's going to pay what damages. I mean seriously do you think at all? Or just defend Obama no matter what he does?

Oh, and is it even possible for you to respond to a post without resorting to third grade name calling? No one will ever take you seriously if you can't (well too late for you to earn respect on  here I know but just some helpful advice for life.)


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Boy are you dumb. The law is right in front of you, and you're still confused



> Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, *or* other benefit,provided for* or* made possible in whole *or* in part by any Act of Congress, *
> 
> or* any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit,




Whatever *employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit* must be *provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress, *

In written english language (maybe you'll learn it someday), a list of options are seperated by commas, with the last choice identified by an *or*. Therefore, "]Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, *or* other benefit' is one clause and the 2nd clause ("provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress") applies to ALL of the options in the 1st clause.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Psst you better reread the part where it says you can't offer an appointment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about a paid appointment. Now let me ask you how does one go about getting on the President's Intelligence Advisory Board?


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



You didn't moron, which is why I didn't say you did. You'd know that if you could read with comprhension.

You stated that CEO's who perform poorly get fired

Like the CEO of BP. Or maybe you think he's doing a fine job.



> Oh, as for your stupid justice delayed justice denied statement. Well, that's just stupid, as is your analogy to the cops investigating a murder.



As usual, you've got no argument, and no facts. You just repeat your whining and hope no one notices how you got nothing.



> Where the hell is BP going to go for the next however long it takes to get this mess cleaned up?



It has nothing to do with BP "going" anywhere. Police collect evidence right away. They don't wait for the evidence to get destroyed and memories to fade. Only an idiot would think there is anything to gain from sitting around on your ass, which explains why it's your preference



> I mean seriously, Obama has said THEY are in charge of the cleanup, so do you want the people who are in charge of this cleanup to be distracted by a civil litigation? I don't .




Whatever makes you think the investigation is going to have anything to do with the people who are in charge of the cleanup. No one is investigating the cleanup, blockhead. They're investigating the explosion that caused the leak, Einstein.

No one involved in the cleanup was at the scene of the explosion. No one involved in the cleanup will be "distracted" because they have no info to offer concerning the explosion. Only a dope like you would think otherwise.

But feel free to tell me what info the people doing the cleanup have to offer the investigation of the explosion. I can't wait to hear what you're going to make up


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> > Whatever *employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit* must be *provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress, *
> 
> 
> 
> Psst you better reread the part where it says you can't offer an appointment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about a paid appointment. Now let me ask you how does one go about getting on the President's Intelligence Advisory Board?



Since reptition sometimes works with the stupid, I'll repeat:

Any *employment,position, compensation,contract, appointment, or other benefit* 

must be 

*provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act ofCongress, *

Paid or unpaid, the appointment must be:
*provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, *


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



WOW, you just really can't do it can  you. Adult debate is just beyond your abilities. 

But we'll try again. So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here? Otherwise , they would very much be involved in any investigation. Let's say COngress decides to have hearings to determine what went wrong, which they should, do you not think that maybe The CEO of BP along with most of his upper management team will be required to testify at some point? Do you not agree that if they are preparing for and attending Congressional hearings they probably are not going to be focusing on cleaning this mess up?

Stop talking about this like it's some sort of criminal investigation where the criminal might throw the murder weapon into the lake if the cops wait too long to get there, that isn't true and you know it. Or maybe you don't......


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here?



Are you hallucinating? Where did I say that.



> Otherwise , they would very much be involved in any investigation. Let's say COngress decides to have hearings to determine what went wrong, which they should, do you not think that maybe The CEO of BP along with most of his upper management team will be required to testify at some point? Do you not agree that if they are preparing for and attending Congressional hearings they probably are not going to be focusing on cleaning this mess up?



Wait a minute? You're actually stupid enough to think BP's CEO is personally directing the cleanup

*BWHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!*



> Stop talking about this like it's some sort of criminal investigation where the criminal might throw the murder weapon into the lake if the cops wait too long to get there, that isn't true and you know it. Or maybe you don't......



Only in wingnut world is it impossible for a corporation, or one of it's employees, to destroy evidence, like memos and other documents.

You know it could happen. You just can't be honest about it.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > So, you've already eliminated BP from any culpability here?
> ...



Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time. 


I believe the bulk of the "evidence" was destroyed when the rig blew up. But if we're just talking about paperwork and such, yes of course BP COULD destroy it, but with the entire world's attention focused on them, do you really think they will be that stupid even if they wanted to? 

Again , this was an accident, but an accident that BP will have to compensate people for, but oh they already announced they would , so why the big hurry to investigate? I'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.



Being responsible for something doesn't mean you actually do it, einstein




> I believe the bulk of the "evidence" was destroyed when the rig blew up. But if we're just talking about paperwork and such, yes of course BP COULD destroy it, but with the entire world's attention focused on them, do you really think they will be that stupid even if they wanted to?



I believe you're stupid enough to think a criminal would just surrender the evidence that proves their guilt.

And I believe you're stupid enough to not realize that if a BP employee did something illegal, that individual might want to destroy that evidence without BP's knowledge.



> Again , this was an accident,



Only a wingnut would come to a conclusion *before* the investigation.



> but an accident that BP will have to compensate people for, but oh they already announced they would , so why the big hurry to investigate?



Only a wingnut, ignorant of the law as they are, would confuse civil penalties (ie compensation) with criminal penalties



> 'd rather they focus on cleaning the area up so those affected can get back to life. Of cours4 some just see deep pockets, and say " go get em."



And that's what really bugs you. Some people are going to get money from BP, and that burns you up.

Conservatives hate when others get something.


----------



## Valerie (Jun 5, 2010)

Obama pressures BP in Gulf visit | Video | Reuters.com


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Well , if BP's CEO isn't personally responsible for the cleanup, then certainly logic would also dictate that he also isn't personally responsible for the clean up, but wait Obama already said he is...................... Damn that logic just destroys the arguments of ideologues such as you every time.
> ...



Bahahahha more childish name calling from you.

I'm done with this argument. You are way too immature for me. You wouldn't acknowledge a point that you didn't agree with if it hit you in the head.

But, I do wonder this, you keep calling me a wingnut. I assume b/c you're under the misguided notion that I am a right winger, well I will tell you that simply isn't true; as I said in another thread, I have actually been called a liberal for many of my stances, oh and here's a shocker I voted for Bill Clinton twice and Dubya oh never.  So you fail on that count also. 

You are just a giant bucket of fail...... No wonder you worship Osama bin Spendalot.


----------



## txlonghorn (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



You are arguing with a brick wall....only this brick wall has less brains


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

I gave sangha credit for having the IQ of a pissant.....I overstated his IQ.


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Your an idiot....your equating this to a murder?  Have you heard about the first 48 in a murder....there is a reason for a quick investigation.
BP isn't going anywhere and will be around for a long time to deal with the legalities.....that are still ongoing.  Your comprehension is minimal, sonny.


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > 18 USC Section 600:
> ...



Reading and comprehending are not your friends, Sangha.   I would be somewhat embarrassed if I were you, but your too ignorant to understand.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> I gave sangha credit for having th IQ of a pissant.....I overstated his IQ.



and insulted pissants everywhere. They demand an apology.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...




He totally and completely ignored me correctly pointing out that the law makes it illegal to offer appointments , I wonder why?


----------



## Meister (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



A partisan hack will never look at or acknowledge the truth.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...


I'm sorry to say that you don't have any practical knowledge of the material in my post and you seem to deliberately misconstrue the content of it, so I won't waste any more of my time on this thread. 

I would recommend the same to any one else who by now likewise feels they are talking to a wall or an arrogant child


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



So you're calling it quits and running away because I exposed your dishonest claim that because he's responsible for the cleanup, the CEO of BP is personally managing the cleanup.

I'm not surprised. Conservatives always run.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Because the appointment has to be provided in whole or in part, by an act of congress.

You'd know that if you could read

but, hey! Didn't you just say you were done with me?

It didn't take long for you to start obsessing with me again.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

OMG you are one stupid little man. Is he personally managing the clean up? No, but you better be damned sure he's havily involved in every decision. Just as any boss would be. But I have an idea that you've never advanced past fry boy in your chosen field, so you don't actually know how that works. 

Same as during an investigation he won't be personally collecting paperwork and such and handing it over to investigators, but he WILL be involved in it. 

Guess you think the guy is just off playing golf while the oil flows..... oh wrong guy.


----------



## txlonghorn (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



because there is NO argument...


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

American Horse said:


> I'm sorry to say that you don't have any practical knowledge of the material in my post and you seem to deliberately misconstrue the content of it, so I won't waste any more of my time on this thread.
> 
> I would recommend the same to any one else who by now likewise feels they are talking to a wall.



Again, the Corp has neither the equipment nor the expertise to help with deep sea work. The fact that they are hydrologists does not mean they know anything about deep sea work. Hydrology is a large feild with many specialties. The corp does not do any deep sea work


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



I don't generally name call, but you're a dumb fuck. Do you really think it's legal for say Donald Trump to go up to Stesak and say hey bro I'll make you the CEO of one of my companies if you'll drop out of the race? I mean really? Why not? Congress certainly didn't create Trump's companies, although I'm sure they have designs on owning them eventually.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> OMG you are one stupid little man.



Gee, didn't you just say you were done with me? And here you are again

I guess it's just another of your many lies. You can't even tell the truth about yourself



> Is he personally managing the clean up? No, but you better be damned sure he's havily involved in every decision. Just as any boss would be. But I have an idea that you've never advanced past fry boy in your chosen field, so you don't actually know how that works.



And you know the CEO is involved in every decision, how?

You're making stuff up again. You can't help but lie about everything. You're a conservative



> Same as during an investigation he won't be personally collecting paperwork and such and handing it over to investigators, but he WILL be involved in it.



And again, you know this how?


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Is it paying job, because if it doesn't pay, and the job wasn't created by an act of congress, it is legal. Since when is it illegal to offer someone a job they can't possible perform if they're running for office?

But if you think it is illegal, then please show me the law which would be broken

Unless you want to make it easy on yourself, and avoid showing you have no law to cite by lying again and saying you're done with me.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > OMG you are one stupid little man.
> ...




I know it because the CEO of BP, or any large corporation, didn't get there by not being involved in everything, especially something as large as this mess. 

Yes, I know I said I was done with you in this thread, but you just set my bullshit meter off and so I have to respond to your inane drivel.


----------



## txlonghorn (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry to say that you don't have any practical knowledge of the material in my post and you seem to deliberately misconstrue the content of it, so I won't waste any more of my time on this thread.
> ...



Would you at least give them credit for doing shallow sea work?  Or above sea work?


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



I'm sorry, but didn't you say you were done with me? And now you're still not done with me?

Doesn't that make you a liar? No wonder you keep avoiding the issue



> I know it because the CEO of BP, or any large corporation, didn't get there by not being involved in everything, especially something as large as this mess.



IOW, you don't know squat. Being "involved in everything" means you have little time for any one thing, like the cleanup.

He has enough time to make commercials and get interviewed on TV. He has enough time to get interviewed under oath


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

I just noticed the following remark, and have just one question

Isn't that just another way of saying you lied when you said you were done with me?



ConHog said:


> Yes, I know I said I was done with you in this thread, but you just set my bullshit meter off and so I have to respond to your inane drivel.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

txlonghorn said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > American Horse said:
> ...



What difference does it make? The leak is under deep sea


----------



## American Horse (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry to say that you don't have any practical knowledge of the material in my post and you seem to deliberately misconstrue the content of it, so I won't waste any more of my time on this thread.
> ...


My intent was leave the deep sea work to bp. the scientists, and the Naval Services. The oil slick is heading for shore now, and for the past five weeks, and berms could've already been raised up on miles of shoreline under Corps of Engineers direction and could've kept the slick from spreading beyond the immediate tidal levels and out of the estuaries.  

Those are the vulnerable areas to be concerned with because of the various biota inland from there.  If the sand at low tide was  raised on the beach side, scraping the sand down to create a steeper bank, virtually all of the orange goo could've been kept at sea.  There it could've been collected By mechanical means.  The outflow from the Mississippi river would preclude the stuff from it's immediate environs. There are ways to increase water flow positively out of some of the lesser outflows


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> I just noticed the following remark, and have just one question
> 
> Isn't that just another way of saying you lied when you said you were done with me?
> 
> ...



It means that despite my best intentions you have suckered me into arguing with a dog turd. But I'm done with this thread , at least as far as you are concerned.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

American Horse said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > American Horse said:
> ...



The history of berms indicates that they do not protect the beaches and often create other problems. Besides, it is not feasible to put a berm around the Gulf of Mexico. The oil isn't going to sit near the berm and wait to be picked up. It just going to land on some other non-bermed shoreline.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > I just noticed the following remark, and have just one question
> ...



It means that you say you will do one thing, and then you do the opposite.


----------



## del (Jun 5, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



seem?


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

del said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



You really seem obsessed with me. I'm all you can talk about


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...




That's cute, you're in every thread in the board spouting your stupid bullshit and every time someone calls you out for stupidity you come back with "you're obsessed  with me"

Here's a hint - You're trying too hard.


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > del said:
> ...



And we can add this to The Big List of Lies conjob Has Told.

del is the 1st person I have ever said that too


----------



## ConHog (Jun 5, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Actually , you've said it to me twice. LIAR


----------



## sangha (Jun 5, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Where? (and since when is twice "every time")


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



And once again, the conjob disappears when his lies are exposed


----------



## ConHog (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...




LOL 

going to bed = disappears? By the way Sangha, anyone who reads your drivel knows who the liar here is, so I'm not worried about proving anything.


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Didn't you say that you were done with this thread *for a 2nd time*?

So why are you back *for a 2nd time*

ANd why can't you point out where I've said you're obsessed with me twice?

You're a coward and a liar. You say one thing, and do another, and you're too chicken to defend your own words


----------



## Meister (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Why do you relegate yourself to a low level trolling position?


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



I think it's hilarious when you pretend be the boards' nanny


----------



## Meister (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



I see your still trolling


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

Meister said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



I see *you're * still stupid


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 6, 2010)

Sanga, why do you use Bush's response to Katrina as a defense for Obama's stupidity. To me both Presidents have failed on these disasters and you have proved what a partisan hack you are.


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

Papageorgio said:


> Sanga, why do you use Bush's response to Katrina as a defense for Obama's stupidity. .



Pg, why don't you learn how to read?

I use Katrina to show the rights hypocrisy.

It was OK for bush to stay on vacation while people were dying in NO, but it's horrible that Obama stayed on vacation even though no one (aside from the 11 killed in the explosion, and Obama couldn't do anything for them) was dying?

It was OK for bush to ignore Gov Blanco's requests for assistance, and then LIE about it and claim Blanco never asked for assistance, but when Obama OK's Jindals requests, it's horrible.



> To me both Presidents have failed on these disasters and you have proved what a partisan hack you are



And we have another rightwinger who sure Obama didn't do something, but who can't say what it is


----------



## ConHog (Jun 6, 2010)

Papageorgio said:


> Sanga, why do you use Bush's response to Katrina as a defense for Obama's stupidity. To me both Presidents have failed on these disasters and you have proved what a partisan hack you are.


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Sanga, why do you use Bush's response to Katrina as a defense for Obama's stupidity. To me both Presidents have failed on these disasters and you have proved what a partisan hack you are.



Smart move posting with pictures. They are at your exact reading level, so now you'll understand what you post


----------



## ConHog (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...





I'd be willing to compare IQ's , education levels, academic achievements , or reading comprehension skills with you any day of the week.


----------



## Samson (Jun 6, 2010)

sangha said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



Maybe you ought go to this link.

I know, I know, .......it will be much more difficult to educate yourselves as to what your government claims to be ITS JOB than to Parrot "BP is responsible".....but try it.....I'll even offer you a cracker for your effort.



> Mission &#8211; The Minerals Management Service manages MMS Funding
> access to the Nation's energy and mineral resources of
> the *Outer Continental Shelf* to help meet the domestic
> demands and other needs of the United States _*while
> ...



How important did the Obama administration feel their duty related to oil spill prevention was?



> Oil Spill Research Program &#8211; This program supports
> oil pollution research and other _*duties related to oil
> spill prevention*_, as authorized by the Oil Pollution Act
> of 1990. The National Oil Spill Response Test Facility is
> ...



$6.3 million?

REALLY!!!??? THAT's IT????

With 2,000,000,000.00 in annual funding, from Royalties, Fees, etc, they could only caugh up $6,300,000.00 to fund oils spill research???

Well, the horse really is already out of the barn for the Obama Administration to actually have done their jobs. So I suppose that now there's not much more the administration, or you can do but repeat, 


_"BP's responsibility, BP's responsibility"_





wanna craker?


----------



## sangha (Jun 6, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



Better yet, why don't you compare what you said you would do (stop talking to me in one thread) with what you really did (continued talking to me in that thread)


----------



## Mini 14 (Jun 6, 2010)

Detonation would seal it. Might have to be a nuclear detonation, but the loss of marine life would be no worse than what we're going to have to endure anyway.

I would have ordered the Navy in there about week 2 and sealed it off for good, but then again, I don't have a standing tee time with my buddies either..


----------



## Samson (Jun 6, 2010)

Mini 14 said:


> Detonation would seal it. Might have to be a nuclear detonation, but the loss of marine life would be no worse than what we're going to have to endure anyway.
> 
> I would have ordered the Navy in there about week 2 and sealed it off for good, but then again, I don't have a standing tee time with my buddies either..



This was the first thing I thought about a week into the spill: Nuc it.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 10, 2010)

Why hasn't Obama called for the suspension of the Jones Act which keeps some of the best and most modern and advanced foreign owned ships from helping in the Gulf?

Some of these countries say they have offered to help by bringing their ships to the Gulf to collect oil from the waters there..... but cannot help out. 

The president could do this with an Executive Order....

Really makes you wonder (The unions are opposed; they really love the Jones Act).




> Within days of the oil spill, several European nations and thirteen countries in total apparently offered the Obama administration ships to assist in the clean-up of the Gulf. When asked about this, a State Department press spokesman refused to identify any offers of assistance.
> 
> According to one newspaper, European firms could complete the task in four months, rather than an estimated nine months if done only by the U.S. Working with the U.S., the cleanup could be accomplished in three months.  The Belgian firm DEME contends it can clean up the oil with accuracy at a depth of 2,000 meters. Another European firm with capabilities is the Belgian firm Jan De Nul Group. There are also Dutch companies with similar special equipment capable of accelerating cleaning-up the Gulf. The Belgians and the Dutch are also long time NATO allies and as such partners in international security cooperation.
> 
> According to the article, no U.S. companies have the ships which can accomplish this task is because those ships would cost twice as much to build in the U.S. as they do outside the country. This is one adverse impact of the Jones Act, which Congress passed in 1920s. This piece of protectionism has only hampered an anemic American maritime industry.  It also has prevented a quicker response to the oil spill.  European firms do have the expertise to clean up the spill.



To Save the Gulf, Send the Jones Act to Davy Jones&#8217; Locker


----------



## antagon (Jun 11, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Why hasn't Obama called for the suspension of the Jones Act which keeps some of the best and most modern and advanced foreign owned ships from helping in the Gulf?
> 
> Some of these countries say they have offered to help by bringing their ships to the Gulf to collect oil from the waters there..... but cannot help out.
> 
> ...



makes you wonder (the heritage foundation is opposed to the act; they hate the jones act)

the fact of the matter is that the jones act has little or nothing to do with cleaning up the oil spill and that international boats have been involved from the inception.  the jones act relegates port to port shipping to american fleets.


----------



## antagon (Jun 11, 2010)

Samson said:


> Mini 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Detonation would seal it. Might have to be a nuclear detonation, but the loss of marine life would be no worse than what we're going to have to endure anyway.
> ...



i think the baseless advise of 2 internet guys is exactly the course of action that we should take.  nevermind anyone's educated opinions; nuke the bitch out of the clear blue.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 11, 2010)

antagon said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > Why hasn't Obama called for the suspension of the Jones Act which keeps some of the best and most modern and advanced foreign owned ships from helping in the Gulf?
> ...



" Some of the best clean up ships &#8211; owned by Belgian, Dutch and the Norwegian firms are NOT being used. *Coast Guard Lt. Commander, Chris O&#8217;Neil, says *that is because they do not meet &#8220;the operational requirements of the Unified Area Command.&#8221; One of those operational requirements is that vessels comply with the Jones Act.
"*Yes, it does apply,&#8221; said ONeil,&#8220; I have heard no discussions of waivers*.&#8221;

Waivers to the Jones Act were granted by the administration of George W. Bush in the days following hurricane Katrina. And today, the Obama White House said waivers might again be considered.
&#8220;If there is the need for any type of waiver, that would obviously be granted,&#8221; said White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs. &#8220;But, we've not had that problem thus far.&#8221;

Democratic Senator Bill Nelson is not so sure about that. He&#8217;s hearing from the folks back home in Florida, where they want all the skimmer ships they can get. He sent a letter to Admiral Thad Allen today which read in part:
&#8220;Admiral, I believe the orange mousse of oil that is now in Florida&#8217;s waters is more than enough evidence that we need to take advantage of every appropriate global resource. Please advise as to whether we are taking full advantage of the offers of assistance from other countries.&#8221;

When asked about this by Fox News, Admiral Allen said, &#8220;If it gets to the point where a Jones Act waiver is required, we're willing to do that too. Nobody has come to me with a request for a Jones Act waiver.&#8221;
After 50 plus days of oil flowing freely into the gulf, the question could be asked: Why do effective and proven foreign clean up ships remain on the sidelines? Carafano believes it may have something to do with the Obama administration&#8217;s close relationship with labor unions.

&#8220;Cause this is a big thing for unions,&#8221; Carafano said. &#8220;*The unions see it as &#8230; protecting jobs. They hate when the Jones Act gets waived, and they pound on politicians when they do that.* So &#8230; are we giving in to unions and not doing everything we can, or is there some kind of impediment that we don't know about?

If the Obama Administration needs an example of what can happen when global assets are allowed to tackle a massive oil spill, they need look no further than Saudi Aramco&#8217;s clean up of a massive wartime spill off the Kuwaiti coast in 1991. *Aramco summoned every available ship to assist in the cleanup. The company claims it recovered 900,000 barrels of oil in roughly three months.* The industry views that effort as the gold standard in oil spill cleanups."

Jones Act Slowing Oil Spill Cleanup?  Liveshots


Questions:  Why hasn't the president put a single person in charge of coordinating the entire effort?  
Why hasn't the president even talked to the Chief Operating Officer of BP, while at this late date he is going to sit down with the board of directors?  
Why does the administration make threatening gestures to BP like threatening to bring criminal charges, and demanding suspension of dividends to shareholders which drives down the share price and the efficacy of the corporation?  
Don't they realize that if they drive BP to bankruptcy that the taxpayers will have to make up any financial shortfall?

Everything the Administration does seems to be political (Unions?) and an "ad hoc" response rather than being coherent and organized around what they can actually accomplish immediately to help the Gulf region. The Bush administration would've had a cogent and organized approach, at least talking to people who understand oil technology. Wouldn't that have given us a foot up?  These deficiencies and mis-directed efforts are reflected in why people in the Gulf give the president  a "D" so far in HIS  performance. They seem to understand that suspending deep drilling operations hurts them a lot more than it helps.

The president should make himself available to a press conference right now and take questions we all want the answers to.


----------



## rdean (Jun 11, 2010)

sangha said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> ...




Well of course not.  Only 6% of scientists are Republican.  They have no clue and no education.  The only thing they know for sure is that Obama is "black" and living in the "White" House.

Seriously, you want to ask "these" people for "ideas"?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 11, 2010)

A better question is what should have Obama NOT done.






Day 4: head off on vacation.






Day 5: Go golfing.






Day 7: Host NY Yankees for Whitehouse event.






Day 9: Fly to Missouri for lunch at Peggy Sue's Diner.






Day 10: Attend DNC fundraiser at swank DC residence.






DAY 12 : Joins Leno for comedy routine at WHCD.

For the remainder of the list of the many events, concerts and fancy dining click here.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 11, 2010)

American Horse said:


> <SNIP>
> *Questions:*  Why hasn't the president put a single person in charge of coordinating the entire effort?
> Why hasn't the president even talked to the Chief Operating Officer of BP, while at this late date he is going to sit down with the board of directors?
> Why does the administration make threatening gestures to BP like threatening to bring criminal charges, and demanding suspension of dividends to shareholders which drives down the share price and the efficacy of the corporation?
> ...



*To continue with this theme...*
We need answers:

Why did the president take 12 days before a Cabinet Level Official visited the Gulf?

What's going on with doctoring a signed document from the Academy of Engineers  after they signed it, distorting their intent on the desirability of shutting down deep wells in the Gulf?


The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing Obama administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium -- something they actually oppose.

The experts, recommended by the National Academy of Engineering, say Interior Secretary Ken Salazar modified their report last month, after they signed it, to include two paragraphs calling for the moratorium on existing drilling and new permits.

*Salazar's report to Obama said* a panel of seven experts "peer reviewed" his recommendations, which included a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs and *an immediate halt to drilling operations.*

"None of us actually reviewed the memorandum as it is in the report," oil expert Ken Arnold told Fox News. "What was in the report at the time it was reviewed was quite a bit different in its impact to what there is now. *So we wanted to distance ourselves from that recommendation."*
(Salazar apologized to the experts Thursday)



*On the subject of shutting down deep wells in operation in the Gulf*:  Scientists and engineers say shutting down these wells is far more dangerous than allowing them to continue in operation.  It&#8217;s a lot like interrupting surgery; things can go wrong, the risks are multiplied.  

Instead, it seems to me, the prudent course of action would&#8217;ve been to simply review the records of each and every Gulf deep well, and to have acted according to any revelations from those records and existing conditions.


----------



## rdean (Jun 11, 2010)

American Horse said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > <SNIP>
> ...



Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen was there since day one.  Are you saying he is as incompetent as "horse show judge" Brownie?


----------



## American Horse (Jun 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > <SNIP>
> ...


He's a Coast Guard Admiral and admininstrator.  From watching his briefings, it apears he could use some help,  If there were a higher level coordinator the effort wouldn't seem so chaotic, incoherent, and incomplete.


----------



## antagon (Jun 11, 2010)

American Horse said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > American Horse said:
> ...



norwegian vessels _Boa Sub C_, _Ocean Intervention III_ and _Skandi Neptune_ have been working with BP as early as april 20.  these are among many foreign vessels operating in aid of this issue.  the _Deep Sea Horizon_ is a foreign vessel operating in US waters.  it is flagged marianas or something.  the jones act is a regulation regarding US port -to- US port shipment of goods.  that has nothing to do with who BP has contracted to help them with their mess.

foreign vessels constitute the majority of ships working in the offshore oil industry in the gulf.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 11, 2010)

Heh.   Perhaps Obama should have treated the oil spill like his campaign.

_It's not mentioned much now, but in the late summer of 2008, a major hurricane, Gustav, was in the Gulf of Mexico and headed toward New Orleans, threatening a replay of the disastrous Katrina experience. On September 1, 2008, Barack Obama, fresh from his Roman-colonnade speech on the final night of the Democratic convention in Denver, talked to CNN's Anderson Cooper about Gustav and the Gulf. The question: As president, could he handle an emergency like that? Obama pointed to the size of his campaign and its multi-million dollar budget as evidence of his executive abilities.* "Our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years," Obama said. That executive ability, he added, "indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect."*_

Notable & Quotable - WSJ.com


On second thought.  Scratch that.  He is handling the oil spill like a campaign.  That's the problem.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 11, 2010)

rdean said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



That only leads to, "What ideas has your side provided?" and if you have any brilliant ideas then why the heck is there still oil gushing out of the floor of the Gulf of Mexico?

Immie


----------



## American Horse (Jun 11, 2010)

antagon said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > Jones Act Slowing Oil Spill Cleanup?  Liveshots
> ...



Apparently we are at cross issues here.  Referring back to  my post #283 above,* Coast Guard Lt. Commander Chris O&#8217;Neil, says* that the Jones Act does apply (How in this case we aren't sure) "they (foreign shipping) do not meet the operational requirements of the Unified Area Command.,&#8221;  one of those operational requirements is that vessels comply with the Act.  He said: "*Yes, it does apply [and] I have heard no discussions of waivers*.&#8221;

The Obama White House (spokesman)  said waivers might again be considered.
&#8220;But, we've not had that problem thus far.&#8221;  &#8220;If there is the need for any type of waiver, that would obviously be granted&#8221;

I have found no further text on how O'Neil believes it does apply, But Democratic Senator Bill Nelson is concerned enough about the Act obstructing foreign ships and assets to not be sure about it.  That's why he sent a letter to Admiral Thad Allen on the subject of the Jones Act which read in part:  &#8220;Admiral, I believe.... we need to take advantage of every appropriate global resource. Please advise as to whether we are taking full advantage of the offers of assistance from other countries.&#8221;

When asked about this by Fox News, Admiral Allen said, &#8220;If it gets to the point where a Jones Act waiver is required, we're willing to do that too. Nobody has come to me with a request for a Jones Act waiver.&#8221;

So are some or many owners of foreign ships confused?  Are they concerned they will need port accesses to dispose of materials that would be in violation of the Jones Act?  

Are they sufficiently disturbed by the President's rhetoric vis-a-vis BP, that they want to be sure all legal impairments to their helping are removed before they pitch in?

What would be wrong with the President simply issuing an Executive Order suspending the Jones Act for all related activities in the Gulf?  

I remember President Bush suspending certain applicable laws (I don't remember which; EPA?) during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, which at the time seemed to make sense, because they would've hampered the essential conduct of  deployed resources and their activities.

BTW where is the head of FEMA these days?  Havent heard a word from him.


----------



## antagon (Jun 11, 2010)

FEMA dude has got to be a suicidal wreck.

i'm not too clear about all the implications of the act, but i know that the cranework, undersea photography and some of the pumping and drilling is being conducted by the three boats i had mentioned.  i know _Skandi Neptune_ is responsible for a lot of that oil bellowing on the ocean floor video.  calls to port will likely be made by barges.  maybe these must be of US construction and crew, dunno.

i know that with the southern merchant fleet impacted, waivers were sought after katrina. our maritime industry simply doesnt put out the sort of workboats and rigs norway and korea put out.  we either have to consider heavily subsidizing our yards like these countries do, or reconsidering the jones.

the national security implications of the act are quite important in today's climate.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 12, 2010)

Just seen on FNC - Florida congressman says administration not communicating within the command effort; Oil could be skimmed up as it approaches the shore 4-or-5 miles out, and no skimmers are in area to stop it.  Oil stains are now being left behind by each wave that reaches shore in Florida Keys  ...

C-Span Video - Mississippi 4th district Congressman Gene Taylor says there is poor communications/coordination between air and sea assets in Gulf, as he has 3 or 4 times seen air observers over football sized oil patches while skimmer vessels are seen heading away ...





> antagon: FEMA dude has got to be a suicidal wreck


 His role ought to be more involved than it is at the present.  His total absence contributes to the Administrations problems in this debacle


----------



## boedicca (Jun 12, 2010)

And:  Why the delay in issuing EPA permits to dredge and build berms?   Where are the booms to contain the oil and prevent it from reaching the coasts and marshes?


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 12, 2010)

boedicca said:


> And:  Why the delay in issuing EPA permits to dredge and build berms?   Where are the booms to contain the oil and prevent it from reaching the coasts and marshes?



Do you really think anything would have been different if John McCain were President?

I honestly do not.  

In other words, don't blame Obama for the inaction, blame the system.

Immie


----------



## American Horse (Jun 12, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > And:  Why the delay in issuing EPA permits to dredge and build berms?   Where are the booms to contain the oil and prevent it from reaching the coasts and marshes?
> ...



Immie, you honestly don't believe that a man 70 years of age with naval and aeronatics experience, and 30 years in congress and the senate would have the same limitations as a junior senator with 2 years in that body, and whose prior experience was a state senator who voted "present" as often as yea or nay?


----------



## boedicca (Jun 12, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > And:  Why the delay in issuing EPA permits to dredge and build berms?   Where are the booms to contain the oil and prevent it from reaching the coasts and marshes?
> ...





That's b'loney.

I don't recall saying McCain would do better, but it's quite likely he would have handled crisis management in a much more expeditious fashion.   The system doesn't have to work on autopilot.


----------



## sarahgop (Jun 12, 2010)

obama cares  more  about  union goon bags  than the  environment.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 12, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...





boedicca said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...



Okay, you two, I think you both need to go back and read what I wrote.

The important part, as far as I am concerned is "blame the system".

The system is at fault much more than President Obama is.  The red tape is the issue.  Convincing those who care about their cut out of the pie to get the F' out of the way is the issue.

A.H., 

I respect the fact that John McCain served this country as a soldier.  He is in my opinion a heroic soldier who suffered dearly for his country.  I respect that and I honor him for that.  I do not by any stretch of the imagination believe that being a heroic soldier translates into being a great (or even a good) politician.

When it comes to politics, I believe John McCain is a miserable failure.  I don't believe that takes away from his accomplishments as a hero and a soldier.

Yes, I do believe he would suffer from the same limitations as President Obama.  Blame the system not the President.

Boedicca,

You did not say McCain would have done a better job.  However, your statements have been that the slowness of the governmental response lies solely upon the shoulders of the President of the United States of America; therefore, I asked you if you honestly believe John McCain would have done a better job.  I could have asked you if you thought Bush would have done better, but then it would have sounded like "BUUUUUSSSSSSHHHHHHH" and that was not the point I was trying to make.  The liberal claim that Bush screwed up the Katrina response is as ridiculous as blaming President Obama for not stopping the oil leak 48 days ago. 

As far as I am concerned the response to this catastrophe has been a miserable failure and I'm sure that technically speaking, the buck should land squarely on the desk inside the Oval Office.  However, I question whether or not anyone else could have done a better job.  Blame the system.

Immie


----------



## antagon (Jun 12, 2010)

actually, immie, i think the blame should fall on BP for the frailty of their response.  

like katrina, i think catastrophe betrays american's lack of solidarity in the face of adversity.  we havent managed to garner the respect we did following 9/11.  we've instead been pussies about these disasters with respect to our choice to wield our suffering as political capital.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 12, 2010)

sarahgop said:


> obama cares  more  about  union goon bags  than the  environment.





Obama cares about destroying this once great nation period. He don't give a damn about the economy, environment. That is just the way it is.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 12, 2010)

antagon said:


> actually, immie, i think the blame should fall on BP for the frailty of their response.
> 
> like katrina, i think catastrophe betrays american's lack of solidarity in the face of adversity.  we havent managed to garner the respect we did following 9/11.  we've instead been pussies about these disasters with respect to our choice to wield our suffering as political capital.



I agree the blame for the catastrophe lies with BP.

The point I was attempting to get across was that as far as American response to the catastrophe we should not be blaming President Obama alone, we should be blaming the entire system.  

I don't think we should be waiting around for BP to get their shit together.  We should be doing everything we can, right now, to stop the leak regardless of where the blame lies.  For whatever reason, that has not happened.  Maybe there is little we can do, but blaming the President for the lack of American action seems wrong in my opinion, just as blaming Bush for the governmental actions after Katrina seemed wrong to me.

Immie


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 12, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > actually, immie, i think the blame should fall on BP for the frailty of their response.
> ...





course not.. he's only supposed to be pretending at leadership right?    lol, the only thing he's offered so far is to forgive the Brits, blame boooooooosh, congress,,,,,, and the tea party.. he sucks..


----------



## antagon (Jun 12, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > actually, immie, i think the blame should fall on BP for the frailty of their response.
> ...



i strongly agree with what you are saying.  politics can profit from aligning blame to individuals, the higher up the ladder the better, but the reality is that systems need more careful consideration - from disaster response to disaster prevention and contingency. from katrina to BP to al-qaeda.

i feel the private sector has more experience and wherewithal to stop the leak; perhaps public management has slowed the process.  i think the nagging pressure model alone would be better than intervening to approve courses of action, etc.

i think that the impact of the oil on the shore could be more effectively dealt with by the government.  dramatically more.  trusting BP to handle that is probably asking too much from them concurrent with their work at the source... someone should recognize that and act accordingly.  some type of intervention.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 12, 2010)

antagon said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > antagon said:
> ...



It is a legitimate argument to suggest that government has hindered the private sector here. The Jones act being a prime example. Waive that sucker so some foreign aid can help out.


----------



## Gremlin-USA (Jun 12, 2010)

BO should have canceled what was left of his vacation

Maybe he should have not gone a second vacation

Maybe BO should have called the CEO of BP sooner than 48 days into the spill

BO should have had more Booms sent, there are still hundreds in storage in CT, I believe

BO should have taken the Offer from Finland or was it the Dutch? any way they offered on day four to send Ships and Equipment.

BO should have allowed the Burn of the first wave of Oil as it was already approved by the MMS

BO should have allowed Bobby Jindal to build the Sand Berms to help keep the Oil from washing on shore.

BO should have had his team together the next day instead of waiting two weeks, BTW has BO" Team come up with anything yet or are they still in committee?

I am sure there are lot more thing he could have done, I am just tired of typing


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

ConHog said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



 the jones act hasn't been a factor; no waiver application/requests have been made, and foreign shipping is extensively employed.

i was talking about the oval office review of the game-plan which forced inferior courses of action to be pursued ahead of the current course.  then again, i don't know all the considerations read into the decisions.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Oil stains are now being left behind by each wave that reaches shore in Florida Keys  ...


 Link please.


----------



## Mini 14 (Jun 13, 2010)

Well, no matter where the blame lies, Alabama's Gulf Coast is now trashed. Up to 38 feet of oil staining the beaches at low tide, and Perdido Pass will be closed to ALL recreational boating by permanent booms for an undetermined amount of time. Mobile Bay will likely be next. 

Residents and visitors to Gulf Shores, Orange Beach, Fort Morgan, Ono Island, began yesterday to report that the effects are FAR worse than what is being reported, and that people should stay away, as the situation began to grow far more dangerous and widespread yesterday.

BP obviously has no clue or is not inclined to stop the leak. Could our government/military have done a better job? Why did they do nothing?

I was in Fort Morgan for Memorial Day. It didn't dawn on me then that at 48 years old, I was seeing the white sand beaches of Alabama for the last time in my lifetime.


----------



## Capitalist (Jun 13, 2010)

The Federal Aviation Administration banned  flights over the GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL AND AFFECTED COASTLINE  this week.



 After all, we don't need any embarrassing photos of the oil slicks.


----------



## Capitalist (Jun 13, 2010)

*Three days after the explosion of the Deepwater  Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, the Dutch government offered to help.*
*It was willing to provide ships outfitted with oil-skimming  booms, and it proposed a plan for building sand barriers to protect  sensitive marshlands.*
*The response from the Obama administration and BP, which are  coordinating the cleanup: The embassy got a nice letter from the  administration that said, Thanks, but no thanks, said Geert Visser,  consul general for the Netherlands in Houston.*
 Now, almost seven weeks later, as the oil spewing from the battered  well spreads across the Gulf and soils pristine beaches and coastline,  BP and our government have reconsidered.
*U.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of  the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed  within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day,  removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.*
 At that rate, how much more oil could have been removed from the Gulf  during the past month?
 The uncoordinated response to an offer of assistance has become  characteristic of this disasters response. Too often, BP and the  government dont seem to know what the other is doing, and the response  has seemed too slow and too confused.
*Federal law has also hampered the assistance. The Jones Act,  the maritime law that requires all goods be carried in U.S. waters by  U.S.-flagged ships, has prevented Dutch ships with spill-fighting  equipment from entering U.S. coastal areas.*
 Whats wrong with accepting outside help? Visser asked. If theres  a country thats experienced with building dikes and managing water,  its the Netherlands.
 Even if, three days after the rig exploded, it seemed as if the Dutch  equipment and expertise wasnt needed, wouldnt it have been better to  accept it, to err on the side of having too many resources available  rather than not enough?
. . .
*While  the skimmers should soon be in use, the plan for building  sand barriers  remains more uncertain. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  supports the idea,  and the Coast Guard has tentatively approved the  pro-ject. One of the  proposals being considered was developed by the  Dutch marine contractor  Van Oord and Deltares, a Dutch research  institute that specializes in  environmental issues in deltas, coastal  areas and rivers. They have a  strategy to begin building 60-mile-long  sand dikes within three weeks.*
*That  proposal, like the offer for skimmers, was rebuffed but  later accepted  by the government. BP has begun paying about $360  million to cover the  costs. Once again, though, the Jones Act may be  getting in the way.  American dredging companies, which lack the  dike-building expertise of  the Dutch, want to do the work themselves,  Visser said.*
HC​


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

Capitalist said:


> *Federal law has also hampered the assistance. The Jones Act,  the maritime law that requires all goods be carried in U.S. waters by  U.S.-flagged ships, has prevented Dutch ships with spill-fighting  equipment from entering U.S. coastal areas.*



the right-wing deception is getting exhausting with the jones act shtick.  the jones act regulates the registration of ships and origin of crews engaged in port to port _shipping_ among US ports.  reading it here, it shows it doesn't even include barges.  dutch ships haven't been involved because neither BP nor the government have contracted them.  other foreign ships have been contracted.  is there a mystery there?


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 13, 2010)

Capitalist said:


> The Federal Aviation Administration banned  flights over the GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL AND AFFECTED COASTLINE  this week.
> 
> 
> 
> After all, we don't need any embarrassing photos of the oil slicks.












They banned flights? Really?


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 13, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Capitalist said:
> 
> 
> > The Federal Aviation Administration banned  flights over the GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL AND AFFECTED COASTLINE  this week.
> ...



Evidently they did, but then there may be very good reasons why they did:

http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_0_5100.html#areas



> All aircraft operations are prohibited except those flights authorized by ATC, routine flights supporting offshore oil operations; federal, state, local and military flight operations supporting oil spill recovery and reconstitution efforts; and air medical and law enforcement operations.
> 
> 1. All pilots operating within and near this area including the shoreline should exercise extreme caution due to the numerous low level operations associated with the deepwater horizon/mc-252 incident 3000 feet and below.
> 
> 2. Aircraft involved in these operations may make sudden changes in direction, speed, and altitude. For additional information, participating aircraft altitude assignments and awareness, all pilots are recommended to review the following web site dedicated to the aviation cleanup efforts at: https://1afnorth.Region1.Ang.Af.Mil/deepwater_spill/default.Aspx



Its easy to think that this is simply to keep the press and the rest of us from pointing out that the government is hiding something, but then if you think about the massive clean up effort that should be going on, and may or may not be going on at the moment, then safety issues might play a very strong reason in regards to why this airspace is currently restricted.

Immie


----------



## American Horse (Jun 13, 2010)

Ravi said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> > Oil stains are now being left behind by each wave that reaches shore in Florida Keys  ...
> ...


I saw a reporter standing on at least one beach in the florida keys (FNC) remarking on how each time the surf came onshore a shadowy stain was left behind; not a lot but still detectable.  Perhaps what would be deposited from an "oil sheen"

CLICK HERE FOR A LINK:  "Oil sheen, tar balls reported in south Florida Keys" (reported in the Palm Beach Palm News)


----------



## American Horse (Jun 13, 2010)

Mini 14 said:


> I was in Fort Morgan for Memorial Day. It didn't dawn on me then that at 48 years old, I was seeing the white sand beaches of Alabama for the last time in my lifetime.



Same here; the beaches of the Florida Space Coast.  I'm pretty sure a Christmas vacation there like we've enjoyed the past three years would be disappointing.

On FNC yesterday there was a reporter who said that many people were taking their vacations earlier than usual to get to Florida before the oil messes up the beaches for who knows how long.


----------



## rightwinger (Jun 13, 2010)

> So what should Obama have done?



If it was the previous president he would have attacked the perpetrators for this unwarranted attack on our shores


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 13, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > American Horse said:
> ...



Looking this up, I just found this:

Tar balls that washed up in Keys not related to Gulf oil spill, Coast Guard says - Sun Sentinel



> KEY WEST  The Coast Guard announced Wednesday morning that the blobs of tar that washed up in the Florida Keys earlier this week are not related to the Gulf oil spill.
> 
> The Coast Guard analyzed the tar balls while evidence mounted that at least some oil from the spill soon would arrive in South Florida.



Nothing else on the first couple of pages of the Goggle Search indicate the arrival of the oil from the spill and here in Tampa they tell us it may get to us but so far we are free and clear.  I suspect we would get it long before Key West, but then maybe currents will carry it around the Tampa Bay Area.

Immie


----------



## American Horse (Jun 13, 2010)

Immie, your link was to an article dated May 19, 25 days old.  The link I found was to an article 3 days old, and the report I saw in FNC, which as I said was a video showing the barest outline in the sand as each wave broke on the beach, probably from the "sheen" was one day old.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 13, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Immie, your link was to an article dated May 19, 25 days old.  The link I found was to an article 3 days old, and the report I saw in FNC, which as I said was a video showing the barest outline in the sand as each wave broke on the beach, probably from the "sheen" was one day old.



You are right.   Thanks for catching that.

Then again, from your link:

Oil sheen, tar balls reported in south Florida Keys; officials laying protective booms



> However, the director of emergency operations and a tourism spokesman in the Keys said they had been told that tests confirmed the oil and tar balls described in the news release did not drift from the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico. And the Coast Guard, which issued the news release, insisted that test results were pending.



And as I said, my search didn't produce any articles off the net that indicate oil from the leak has washed up on the beaches of the keys.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

So far the only stuff washing up is in the Panhandle. Not sure how long that will be true.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2010)

Another thing Obama, and Congress, should have done:   suspend or approve a waiver of the Jones Act so that foreign owned and staffed vessels and equipment could be used to mitigate the disaster:

_The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (P.L. 66-261) is a United States Federal statute that regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports.

Section 27, also known as the Jones Act, deals with cabotage (i.e., coastal shipping) and requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried in U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. The purpose of the law is to support the U.S. merchant marine industry, but agricultural interests generally oppose it because, they contend, it raises the cost of shipping their goods, making them less competitive with foreign sources.

In addition, amendments to the Jones Act, known as the Cargo Preference Act (P.L. 83-644), provide permanent legislation for the transportation of waterborne cargoes in U.S.-flag vessels.

The cabotage provisions restrict the carriage of goods or passengers between United States ports to U.S. built and flagged vessels. In addition, at least 75 percent of the crewmembers must be U.S. citizens. Moreover foreign repair work of U.S.-flagged vessels hull and superstructure is limited to 10 percent foreign-built steel weight. This restriction largely prevents American shipowners from refurbishing their ships at overseas shipyards.

...


The Coast Guard and the Administration are quick to point out that some foreign technology is being used in the current cleanup effort. Including:

- Canadas offer of 3,000 meters of containment boom

- Three sets of COSEQ sweeping arms from the Dutch

- Mexicos offer of two skimmers and 4200 meters of boom

- Norways offer of 8 skimming systems

*But that is largely technology transferred to US vessels. Some of the best clean up ships  owned by Belgian, Dutch and the Norwegian firms are NOT being used.

Requests for waivers of certain provisions of the act are reviewed by the United States Maritime Administration on a case by case basis.* Waivers have been granted for example, in cases of national emergencies or in cases of strategic interest. For instance, declining oil production prompted MARAD to grant a waiver to operators of the 512-foot Chinese vessel Tai An Kou to tow an oil rig from the Gulf of Mexico to Alaska. The jackup rig will be under a two-year contract to drill in the Alaskas Cook Inlet Basin. The waiver to the Chinese vessel is said to be the first of its kind granted to an independent oil-and-gas company. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff temporarily waived the U.S. Shipping Act for foreign vessels carrying oil and Natural gas from September 1 to 19, 2005...._


The Jones Act And Gulf Oil Spill  Emptysuit


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

again with the jones act garbage.  

this is effectively a litmus test for gullibility and partisan bias.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

antagon said:


> again with the jones act garbage.
> 
> this is effectively a litmus test for gullibility and partisan bias.



I guess so.

I'm totally out-of-the-loop regarding foriegn aid and how its been received or not.

Do you know if its been offered or rejected for any reason?


----------



## American Horse (Jun 13, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> And as I said, my search didn't produce any articles off the net that indicate oil from the leak has washed up on the beaches of the keys.
> 
> Immie



The purpose of my links in the first place was to point out that things could be done, and whether or not oil on the surface of the gulf has arrived, it is impending.  

That means there is no better time to prevent it, than before it arrives; if not  the barest of residue, then as a black mass.

C-Span Thursday June 10th 
Mississippi Democrat Congressman Gene Taylor on the Unified Command on local solutions, and coordination:
(06:20)

C-Span Host: " Well congressman how receptive is the unified command to local solutions?

Congrssman Taylor: We&#8217;re gonna see. In the beginning the goals were set pretty low, a lot of local mayors wanted to put a boom across a harbor that still leaves the beaches exposed. In the beginning the goal was to keep the wetlands from getting covered and that has been achieved so now that we&#8217;ve got some short term goals, I think its&#8217; realistic to ask that we keep it off our barrier islands that we keep it out of our sound and distance works, time and distance are working in our favor; we would have some warning that it&#8217;s coming, even a bad current we have some time ...

The other thing that I&#8217;ve really noticed, and I&#8217;ve flown the spill 4-times now is I&#8217;ve seen no co-ordination between overhead observers and what the skimmer boats are doing. You would see a patch, you know, of oil the size of a football field... &#8220;here..&#8221; and you&#8217;d see a skimmer boat over there that wasn&#8217;t headed  towards it so you&#8217;ve got to have a lot better co-ordination between what&#8217;s going on the deck and what&#8217;s going on overhead.&#8221; 
(07:50)

The state of Mississippi is fortunate that is has perhaps 5 rivers flowing into the Gulf. This outflow (according to Taylor at least in Ms) helps  prevent flows of oil on the surface from reaching beaches.   That&#8217;s why a coordinated effort of collecting the oil off shore is critical.  Congressman Taylor was reporting on that failure of coordination on the 10th of June on C-Span.


----------



## American Horse (Jun 13, 2010)

antagon said:


> again with the jones act garbage.
> 
> this is effectively a litmus test for gullibility and partisan bias.


Antagon, better minds than ours still have questions on its applicability.  This Sunday's news shows aren't informed and questions are still being asked.  Why didn't Gibbs give more than a cursory answer to this question at the last WH briefing?

Isn't it possible that the "open question" has private parties who own applicable assets perturbed?  
They may have trouble getting answers.  This should've already been put to bed but it hasn't.  The failure appears to be with the administration not with those who ask, some perhaps at risk of coming in conflict with US law.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2010)

antagon said:


> again with the jones act garbage.
> 
> this is effectively a litmus test for gullibility and partisan bias.




It is indeed.  Your knee jerk response is a litmus test demonstrating your failure to properly analyze the oil disaster and the government's poor response.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 13, 2010)

American Horse said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > And as I said, my search didn't produce any articles off the net that indicate oil from the leak has washed up on the beaches of the keys.
> ...



I guess where my hang up here is with this:



> I saw a reporter standing on at least one beach in the florida keys (FNC) remarking on how each time the surf came onshore a shadowy stain was left behind; not a lot but still detectable. Perhaps what would be deposited from an "oil sheen"



It seems that the reporter is attempting to insinuate that this oil washing up on the beaches of the keys is from the BP Oil slick and as far as I can tell that is not yet happening.

Something that may seem ironic here is that I watched a report the other night about this here in the Tampa Bay Area that said that eventually this could be picked up by the Gulf Stream travel South along Florida's West Coast (whether or not it would affect the West Coast beaches is unknown, travel through the Florida Straits (yes, destroying the beaches of the keys) back up the East Coast of Florida all the way to the Carolinas.  At which point it would head out to sea... guess where it would end up?  That is right, the shores of Great Britain itself!

Let's pray it doesn't get out of the generalized area it is now in and prayerfully stays off the Gulf Beaches as well.

Immie

Note: sorry, I don't have a link to prove the flow of the oil, that was simply what I saw on TV.  Anyone that wants to prove or disprove that can look it up as easily as I can.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

boedicca said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > again with the jones act garbage.
> ...



The knee-jerk response is to litmus test as jumping through a hoop is to sticking your toe in the water.


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

boedicca said:


> Another thing Obama, and Congress, should have done:   suspend or approve a waiver of the Jones Act so that foreign owned and staffed vessels and equipment could be used to mitigate the disaster:
> 
> _The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (P.L. 66-261) is a United States Federal statute that regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports.
> 
> ...



This is what drives me to drink.

*The Administration already HAS the authority under law and regulation to waive the provisions of any laws that would arguably impede its ability to contain the spill and clean it up.*

I posted the relevant law and related regulations just the other day after doing additional research when another member posted a link to the general law and some commentary about regulatory authority.





> Clean Water Act
> Section 311 - Oil and Hazardous Substances Liability
> 
> * * * *
> ...


 Clean Water Act - Section 311 - Oil and hazardous substances liability | Region 7 | US EPA

*So what the devil is this "I'm in charge" President waiting for?
*

Also, here's an interesting article on the matter addressing the corresponding Administrative REGULATIONS:  The Coast Guard Is In Charge In The Gulf | David Pettit's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

Apparently all this hysteria over the Jones Act is just more bullshit from the rightwingloons and FAUX news.

Fuck you assholes.



> If it was true...
> Well... a simple call and email correspondence yesterday afternoon  with the Unified Command unequivocally disputes and refutes the Fox News  story.
> In an official statement by the Unified Command's Lt. Erik Halvorson,  Chief, Joint Information Center of the Unified Area Command said:
> *All potential foreign technology solutions are being  reviewed for their suitability to meet response requirements.  As  Admiral Allen said this morning, he will review waivers of the Jones Act  if they are requested, but so far no requests have been made.  I am not  aware of any instance in which needed foreign ships or technology have  not been accepted due to the Jones Act. The Jones Act is not preventing  us from getting the technology that we need.*
> ...


City Brights: Yobie Benjamin : True or false? FOX News: Obama & unions block oil spill clean up efforts


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

Also from the link above:

DDENDUM:  I followed up on readers' comments and again asked the US  Coast Guard to elaborate.  Their direct response is again through the  Unified Command's Lt. Erik Halvorson, Chief, Joint Information Center of  the Unified Area Command and is as follows:  *"...I tell you that we have reviewed all international  offers of assistance.  More specifically, that the Unified Area Command  has received 21 offers of assistance from 17 countries and four  international organizations.  These offers came through the U.S. State  Department.
  All offers were reviewed by the Unified Area Command.  All qualifying  offers were accepted.
  Those offers of international assistance that were not accepted did  not meet the operational requirements of the Unified Area Command.
  These offers have not been declined.  They may be needed in the  future as our response strategies change.  We will reconsider them as  necessary.
  The Unified Area Command reviews all offers of assistance as the  operational situation changes and if an offer meets an operational need,  we will pursue acceptance."
*  Again, according to the USCG, the Jones Act was not a consideration.   That said, I am still waiting for the USCG to clarify the story about  declining the Dutch offer. 





But total assholes like Liarbility will still continue top lie about this issue, mark my words.


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Apparently all this hysteria over the Jones Act is just more bullshit from the rightwingloons and FAUX news.
> 
> Fuck you assholes.
> 
> ...



Ravi:

I understand that you are retarded, but you are wrong.  So despite your retardation, you need to learn to accept some of those pesky "fact" thingies.



> June 10, 2010 - 5:41 PM | by: Brian Wilson
> 
> Foreign companies possessing some of the worlds most advanced oil skimming ships say they are being kept out of efforts to clean up the oil spill in the Gulf because of a 1920s law known as the Jones Act -- a protectionist law that requires vessels working in US waters be built in the US and be crewed by US workers.
> 
> ...


 Jones Act Slowing Oil Spill Cleanup?  Liveshots


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

furthermore, many foreign vessels are working on this situation, already.  the deepwater horizon is a foreign vessel.  the jones act has to do with the origin and crew of boats shipping goods from one american port to another.  that has little or nothing to do with the spill.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

Liability said:


> Yes, Ravi, I am a liar.http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/...cleanup/comment-page-4/?action=late-new&order


Editorialized bullshit from FAUX as my link shows.


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

Liability said:


> Ravi:
> 
> I understand that you are retarded, but you are wrong.  So despite your retardation, you need to learn to accept some of those pesky "fact" thingies.



do you accept the fact norwegian boats have been working on the spill since april?  how does that reflect on _your_ level of retardation?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 13, 2010)

antagon said:


> furthermore, many foreign vessels are working on this situation, already.  the deepwater horizon is a foreign vessel.  the jones act has to do with the origin and crew of boats shipping goods from one american port to another.  that has little or nothing to do with the spill.


Exactly. Liarbility and his ilk would probably love to see the entire gulf coast destroyed so they could continue spreading lies. Bastards make me ill.


----------



## Capitalist (Jun 13, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Capitalist said:
> ...



 On the other hand, this smacks of Soviet-style censorship.  In America we expect to receive real  news.
Well we used to.
Hope and change.


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Also from the link above:
> 
> DDENDUM:  I followed up on readers' comments and again asked the US  Coast Guard to elaborate.  Their direct response is again through the  Unified Command's Lt. Erik Halvorson, Chief, Joint Information Center of  the Unified Area Command and is as follows:  *"...I tell you that we have reviewed all international  offers of assistance.  More specifically, that the Unified Area Command  has received 21 offers of assistance from 17 countries and four  international organizations.  These offers came through the U.S. State  Department.
> All offers were reviewed by the Unified Area Command.  All qualifying  offers were accepted.
> ...




First of all RavingFool, I didn't bring up the Jones Act.  I merely responded to a comment about it by pointing out that to whatever extent it (the Jones Act) was deemed any kind of a bar to the cleanup effort, it was subject -- unilaterally -- to waiver by the Administration.

That much is plainly true, you lying bitch.  It's right there in the law.

Secondly, you lying idiot, if the Jones Act has not been seen as some kind of impediment, then perhaps YOU have a rational coherent explanation for what Coast Guard Lt. Commander, Chris ONeil was himself quoted as saying.

And if a waiver is not an issue, then why did the Administration's idiot mouthpiece, gibbs, say THIS:  If there is the need for any type of waiver, that would obviously be granted, said White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs. But, we've not had that problem thus far.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 13, 2010)

Ravi said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > furthermore, many foreign vessels are working on this situation, already.  the deepwater horizon is a foreign vessel.  the jones act has to do with the origin and crew of boats shipping goods from one american port to another.  that has little or nothing to do with the spill.
> ...



You know that I like you, but that is a low blow.

What on Earth did he say that would indicate he wanted the entire gulf coast destroyed?



Capitalist said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



Like I said, it is easy to think that and I am not denying the possibility.  However, safety for the men and women working to clean up the mess first.

Immie


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

And speaking now of  the Jones Act, why HASN'T President "I'm in charge" Obama just simply and unilaterally already issued an Executive Order WAIVING the applicability of the Jones Act for the duration of this Ecological emergency and the related clean up efforts in the Gulf?

It would be supremely easy to do.  He already HAS (as I noted when I quoted the relevant section of the law) been granted the authority to do exactly that.   What the fuck is that schmuck waiting for?

Sign the EO, tell the Admiral all about it, give him a damn copy in fact, and that way if any other nation offers one of its ships and crews to help in this clean up effort, in whatever way the Admiral might need, nobody will have to worry about whether or not the Jones Act is an impediment.

Viola.  Problem pre-solved.  

Indeed, the President -- by the same stroke of his fucking pen -- could waive the possibly conflicting provisions of ANY OTHER laws which might impede the clean up efforts.  

What's he waiting for?


----------



## antagon (Jun 13, 2010)

Samson said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > again with the jones act garbage.
> ...



the US does not accept aid by way of habit.  not 9/11, not katrina, not the spill.

the jones act hype is a blogosphere contention which purports that a fed act which regs shipping between US ports has something to do with whether or not the US accepts aid from the 17 or so nations which have offered, or whether BP contracts from the hundreds of firms available.  

the fact of the matter is that international vessels, including the deepwater horizon itself and skandi neptune, the norwegian ship responsible for the undersea video broadcasts all over the news, have been at the center of this mess from day one.  

ignoring that to pursue a partisan agenda supported by blogger-sources makes a clear statement.


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

antagon said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > antagon said:
> ...



The main statement being made here is that you are a rabid partisan hack.

If the Jones Act has not been an impediment to accepting aid from other nations and their ships and crews, then the statement of Coast Guard Lt. Commander Chris ONeil must just have been a mistake.   (I'm sure you can provide some link or source for how and why that statement is not what it appears to have been.    )  

But gee.  For SOME reason, you and RavingLunatic seem not to want to confront that.

And just to make sure that nobody in the Government (or BP at the control of the government) "erroneously" interprets the Jones Act as a block to accepting offered assistance or ships, etc., then why not just have an Executive Order WAIVING the applicability of the Jones Act (and similar laws which might impede the clean up efforts) for the duration of the cleanup?  At worst, it would be meaningless.  But it MIGHT serve to avoid allowing red tape to screw up the clean-up efforts.


----------



## Liability (Jun 13, 2010)

Here's an interesting little read:



> U.S. not accepting foreign help on oil spill
> Posted By Josh Rogin Thursday, May 6, 2010 - 10:52 AM Share
> 
> When State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley refused to tell reporters which countries have offered assistance to help respond to the BP oil spill, the State Department press corps was flabbergasted.
> ...



U.S. not accepting foreign help on oil spill | The Cable

Out of curiosity, if the message is what it appears to be:  "no thanks boys, but we have it covered," then WTF exactly ARE these Obama Administration assclowns actually DOING?

That's a LOT of fucking oil hitting lots of beaches on our Southern shores, you damn imbeciles.  Exactly WHAT do "we" have so well "covered" that we can act so high and mighty in turning down offers of assistance?  Fine.  Turn down Iran.  But why would we turn down an offer from France or Germany?


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2010)

The electoral map might explain Obama's disinterest in actually doing something, although one would think he'd at least be doing something for FL.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

Liability said:


> Sign the EO, *tell the Admiral all about it*, give him a damn copy in fact, and that way if any other nation offers one of its ships and crews to help in this clean up effort, in whatever way the Admiral might need, nobody will have to worry about whether or not the Jones Act is an impediment.
> 
> Viola.  Problem pre-solved.
> 
> ...



Um...since the Admiral had a similar supervisory role coordinating disaster relief after Katrina, and if Bush waived the Jones Act days after Katrina, I'd expect the Admiral is NOT the one that needs a copy of the statute.

My guess is the Admiral has probably asked them to move on it a long time ago, but was ignored by an administration that is obviously in well over its head. He had no recourse but to go to the media.

I predict the Admiral will soon be asked to walk the plank.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

boedicca said:


> The electoral map might explain Obama's disinterest in actually doing something, although one would think he'd at least be doing something for FL.



It must be a comfort to know that if The Big One hits the Bay Area, Obama will be there to help you.

Do you have a spare room?


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2010)

I suspect he'd prefer to stay at the Getties' place.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

boedicca said:


> I suspect he'd prefer to stay at the Getties' place.



Well, I know you'd be sad if he didn't even consider Chez Boe.

Maybe you should practice your Fried Chicken recipe, just in case?


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2010)

I hear he prefers Wagyu Beef medallions and argula.


----------



## Samson (Jun 13, 2010)

boedicca said:


> I hear he prefers Wagyu Beef medallions and argula.



As I'm not in the Fan Club, I only can guess at his preference for Regular or Extra Crispy.

Is argula like really expensive mustard greens?


----------



## Darkwind (Jun 13, 2010)

sangha said:


> Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> However, when I've asked many of these people what Obama should have done, they suddenly stop posting. So far, only one whiner has offered a suggestion, and it was.....get this... Obama should have put his boots on, and gone to LA to have his picture taken on a oil-stained beach wearing his boots.
> 
> So let's hear it you oil cleanup Einsteins? Are you going to wimp out like you usually do and not post in order to avoid having your ignorance and hateful hypocrisy revealed, or will display some strength of character and meet the challenge?



Really?  You are this pathetic that you will shill for Obama given the fact that his job was to contain and keep the oil from getting to our shores first and worry about sending the bill to BP last.

Is this your position?


----------



## Capitalist (Jun 14, 2010)

The  Times reported:
A high-level British offer of help to clean up the Gulf  of Mexico oil spill was rebuffed by America shortly after the accident,  fuelling fresh fears of political tension between the two countries over  the disaster.
 A few days after the BP-leased rig sank on April 22, the Cabinet  Office made a direct offer to the US State Department to airlift half of  Britains 1,200-tonne stockpile of chemical dispersants, The Times has  learnt.
 At the time there was an urgent demand for fresh supplies. The offer  to provide the chemicals, at the cost price of £3 million, was made  through diplomatic channels and via the Civil Contingency Secretariat,  the Governments emergency planning unit.
 A spokeswoman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change, which  was also involved in drafting the plan, said that the US had chosen not  to accept the offer. Officials said the US claimed that the chemicals  held in Britain did not have the correct paperwork.​


----------



## antagon (Jun 15, 2010)

i think it is telling of our education system that so many americans lack the historical foundation to understand that for over 150 years the US has not sought foreign state-funded aid, help or support for causes in the western hemisphere from any states in europe as part of the wider-reaching implications of the monroe doctrine.  

our 'thanks, but no thanks, we've got it covered' policy is pretty central to our history with respect to circumstances of need such as this and is evident from our civil war (save for southern separatists), clear through to modern tragedy in 9/11, and katrina.

nevertheless, whether through ignorance or partisan bias, some attribute this action to the current government (or bush's in katrina or 9/11).  presuming that something like the jones act is preventing much needed foreign vessels from operating in the gulf for the purposes of repair, cleanup or mitigation would be validating of these claims.

to the contrary, this is the reality:




the rig in the foreground (ground? ) is the swiss-owned, singaporean laid, vanuatu registered development driller III
the red rig in the middle is the q4000, an american vessel directly over the spot where the korean made, british owned, marshalls registered deepwater horizon used to be.  the boat to the left in the red is the boa sub c, a norwegian vessel that has been at work there since april 20.  the other red vessel looks like skandi neptune, which has also been there from the jump.

you decide:




the skandi neptune, a norwegian laid and flagged vessel.

one of the vessels in blue are from american firm, oceaneering, the norweigian laid and flagged Ocean Intervention III.  i could speculate that the sistership from the same firm is of similar origin, but i only know from here that these three were at sea as early as the 20th.

finally, the largest vessel colored to match its swiss owned/operated co-worker in the front is the discoverer enterprise, built in spain, flagged in the marshalls.

in light of this concerted, commercial, international effort to cap the broke rig last month, one might consider arguments that the jones act is impeding international response to be absolutely rediculous.  the only impediment that i see is that there's only so much room for these big-ass ships to operate, and only a few companies have been contracted to do so in light of that.  naturally this leaves a world of gracious declines of assistance - just the opportunity for a partisan spin-doctor to run with.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Thanks for all the info, antagon.

Funny...no one ever said we were turning down help (besides the wingnuts), rather that our government was evaluating each offer for feasibility.

It is so easy to twist words...and the Obama bashers are masters at it.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Thanks for all the info, antagon.
> 
> Funny...no one ever said we were turning down help (besides the wingnuts), rather that our government was evaluating each offer for feasibility.
> 
> It is so easy to twist words...and the Obama bashers are masters at it.



Take your head out of Obama's ass and perhaps you could see the truth.

Opposing Views: Obama Refuses to Waive Law to Allow Foreign Help With Oil Spil 

According to Foreign Policy, thirteen entities had offered the U.S. oil spill assistance within about two weeks of the Horizon rig explosion. They were the governments of Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands
, Norway, Romania, Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United Nations.

The U.S. response - Thank you, but no thank you, we've got it.

"..While there is no need right now that the U.S. cannot meet, the U.S. Coast Guard is assessing these offers of assistance to see if there will be something which we will need in the near future."

Why Did The U.S. Refuse International Help on The Gulf Oil Spill? | Before It's News


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Your talking points don't match reality. In the case of just Norway, at least three of their ships have been helping since the day the platform blew.

I don't expect you to speak the truth...either because of stupidity or just dishonesty, it is impossible for you.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Your talking points don't match reality. In the case of just Norway, at least three of their ships have been helping since the day the platform blew.
> 
> I don't expect you to speak the truth...either because of stupidity or just dishonesty, it is impossible for you.



Link?


----------



## antagon (Jun 15, 2010)

its a matter of state to state disaster aid in contrast to commercial contracts which are the responsibility of BP who's all committed to the fix.  oceaneering, transocean(the swiss) and subsea 7(the norwegian boats, and a conglomerate of  halliburton pedigree) are all existing BP contractors, of course.  that they haven't intimately and directly involved their competitors and their contractors is understandable.  

anyhow, deep water engineering is not a US dominated sector, and it is no mystery that with the international nature of the oil industry, that the majority of rigs are foreign to the US as are the ships which place and service them.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Thanks for all the info, antagon.
> 
> Funny...no one ever said we were turning down help (besides the wingnuts), rather that our government was evaluating each offer for feasibility.
> 
> It is so easy to twist words...and the Obama bashers are masters at it.



I have no idea whether or not we have turned down a single offer of help.  All I know so far is that some people who don't particularly like our President and like to blame him for everything have said so, but let me ask you this.  If if is true that we are holding back offers for assistance, just how long do you think we should allow the oil to seep into the gulf before we quit evaluating the situation and start accepting help where it is offered?

Immie


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for all the info, antagon.
> ...



Then you obviously didn't read the links I provided or your just a partisan hack with your head up Obama's ass.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



First since I have not been conversing with you or reading your posts, I have not read your links.

Secondly, if they are what I suspect they are, more drivel from a right wing bitch sites, they still do not provide proof of anything.  That is the problem, you can't trust the frigging media any longer.  They all have their agendas and you can't trust a frigging thing they say as 90% of the time they are stretching the truth beyond all recognition.

Immie


----------



## Capitalist (Jun 15, 2010)

*
*


 How many Czars do we have now?



_(click image for video)_


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



So it's the latter not the former. Ok got it!


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for all the info, antagon.
> ...


Not evaluating the situation but evaluating the offers of help. For instance, what did these countries offer to do, how helpful would their efforts be and would it take away from what is being done now?


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Capitalist said:


> *
> *
> 
> 
> ...



Obama loves the czars, they bypass that pesky Senate confirmation problem.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Spin spin spin.... the fact remains, other countries offered their services Obama denied their help.  Now how about that link about Norway helping us from day one??


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Your talking points don't match reality.* In the case of just Norway, at least three of their ships have been helping since the day the platform blew.*
> ...



bump


Still waiting on you to back up your claim!!!


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


If I can find it on google so can you.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Ravi, you're clearly wrong on this one, the Administration admits that no Jones Act waivers have been issued so in order for a Danish ship to be helping they would have to be there without such waiver, and we both know that isn't  the case.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

- De må ha visst at lekkasjen var mye større - nyheter - Dagbladet.no


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> - De må ha visst at lekkasjen var mye større - nyheter - Dagbladet.no



care to provide a link in English?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



It's your claim, you back it up. That's usually how things work. And if you refuse to back up your claim then it would be obvious that you made the shit up. But being the liars that you liberals are, it would come as no surprise.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



I'm sorry for you to insinuate that anyone is a partisan hack is absolutely laughable.  You give TM a run for her money.

Also, you are not even smart enough to figure out who is on your side and who is not.  So maybe you should pull your head out of Bush's ass or is it up Steele's now?

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > - De må ha visst at lekkasjen var mye større - nyheter - Dagbladet.no
> ...


 Jesus how do you people operate in cyberspace?


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Okay, then how long do we evaluate the offers of help while allowing millions upon millions of gallons of oil seep into the sea? Don't you think we should be accepting every offer that is given now (except maybe the idiocy of a nuclear bomb detonated beneath the floor of the gulf to "seal" the leak) and then work on figuring out which ones work best, works okay and don't work at all?  

The arrogance of the administration to turn away offers of help no matter who it is offered by is absolutely unbelievable.

Immie


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



It's his "proof" so let him provide it in a language I can understand. Here he can prick from 

English
French
Spanish
Arabic -well I don't know that I really speak it but I can make myself understood and understand others somewhat.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



I don't lie so that puts me in a whole different catagory than your friend TM. 

I call 'em as I see 'em and you seemed to be moving in the direction of the rest of the partisan hacks. There are literally hundreds of articles written about how Obama refused foreign help and refuses to waive the Jones Act, yet you simply dimiss 'em as right wing websites. Newsflash for you, you'd be hard-pressed to get the truth from any mainstream media source. 

By the way, I don't give a rat's ass whose side who is own. FTR, I'm not a Republican.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


I have no idea what was offered. I have no idea if what was offered would be helpful or not. 

heh...didn't Iran offer help the other day?


----------



## Meister (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> - De må ha visst at lekkasjen var mye større - nyheter - Dagbladet.no



excellent link, Ravi...please translate it for all of us to read


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

For perhaps the millionth time, the Jones Act has to deal with transporting goods for sale between American ports...it has nothing to do with other countries helping us.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Apparently no one has heard of google translator.


> The  three Norwegian vessels, Boa Sub C, Ocean Intervention III and Skandi  Neptune, all Norwegian crew on board were located nearby, when it was  sent out distress signals from the oil rig. De var  dermed blant de første til å delta i redningsaksjonen.​ They were  among the first to join the rescue operation.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



I'm not a Republican either.

And the fact that I don't trust the Media regardless of which side they take has nothing to do with a damned thing.  As I said, everyone of them have their own agendas.  I only said right wing this time because that is *ALL* you use.  Had I been commenting upon Ravi's "sources" I would have said left wing.

And quite frankly, I'm trying to look at things in a little bit less of a partisan manner.  I'm trying to give the President the benefit of the doubt.  Simply trying.  I think it is disgusting nothing concrete has been done to fix this problem.  I'm hopeful something, anything, is being done.  I can take the Media's word for it as you seem to have done without so much as batting an eye or I can remain skeptical that once again the media is sensationalizing the truth.  Quite frankly, I'm going to stick with the sensationalizing the truth theory because the media has not given me reason in a very long time, not to.

My comments to the dear Ravi were that regardless of what the media says, something should have been done about this by now.  I sure as hell was not excusing the lack of progress so far.

Immie


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Apparently no one has heard of google translator.
> 
> 
> > The  three Norwegian vessels, Boa Sub C, Ocean Intervention III and Skandi  Neptune, all Norwegian crew on board were located nearby, when it was  sent out distress signals from the oil rig. De var  dermed blant de første til å delta i redningsaksjonen.​ They were  among the first to join the rescue operation.



That's a far cry from your claim  that "at least three of their ships have been helping since the day the platform blew.".


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently no one has heard of google translator.
> ...


How stupid are you? IQ of 56? This shows exactly that three of their ships have been on hand since day one...the robots are also being operated by some of these ships.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



So AP is right wing?


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I do not know about Iran.  I have seen reports that the administration admits that some offers have been received.  I have heard rumors that offers of vessels to skim up the oil have been made, surely there can't be a problem with ships skimming up the oil?  If you ask me, the more the merrier in that case.  

Or maybe there is a problem?  Maybe the Administration thinks when we skim up the oil we can produce fuel oil from it?  

In that case, we should keep those other ships out of our water and get all of the oil we can and the hell with the fact that much off it will wash up on the beaches of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida and where ever else it gets to and destroy those beaches for years to come?  And let's not even bat an eye about the marine life this is destroying!

We should at least be accepting those offers.  

Immie


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



No it shows that three Norwegian ships were nearby. It doesn't say what if any action was taken by these ships and for what duration.  Give us a link in English and you may convince someone, but until then you have nothing!


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



on hand =/= participating in the cleanup. It seems like they did participate in the rescue, and they are to be commended for that, but once the cleanup started they were kindly asked to back off, which they have.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...


You are free to look for yourself. As I said before you are either very stupid or a liar. I gave up trying to convince people like you of anything for lent and I never turned back.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Like I said in my first response to you, but you were obviously incapable of comprehending, "*First since I have not been conversing with you or reading your posts, I have not read your links.*".  I had not been conversing with you in the least.  I really was not interested in your POV, because you are a partisan hack that rivals Truthmatters.  

You have no credibility in my books.  Therefore, as I said, "First *since I have not been conversing with you or reading your posts, I have not read your links.*"

I'm sorry to have to inform you of this, but I don't read everyone of your posts.  Never have and never will.  Doesn't mean I never read your posts, but you simply don't register as a must read in my books.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...


Nope...the Skandi and at least one of the others are operating some of the underwater robots.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Nah, I'll just chalk it up as another one of your bullshit claims.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



Yes you said you didn't read the links because you dismissed them as right wing websites. Stay ignorant your entire life, I really don't care. It's obvious you had your head buried in the sand if you didn't know anything about Obama's refusal to allow foreign aid to help out with the oil leak. I was simply trying to enlighten your dumb ass.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




BP has contracted with at least four robotics companies, including Oceaneering International Inc., Subsea 7 and C-Innovation, to do the work.

Teams of humans on boats are controlling the robots, which have names like Maxximum, Hercules and Skandi Neptune. The human operators -- two for each robot -- drive using joysticks, but they cant see where their undersea avatars are going. Even with headlights, the robots environment is almost completely dark, so they use sonar to gauge their proximity to objects. 

The ROVs range in size from that of a small car to a big truck, although most of their bulk consists of foam intended to protect them from the intense pressures found at 5,000 feet below the surface. They remain connected to fiber-optic or copper tethers that enable communications, but sometimes ocean currents tangle or even break those lifelines.

The spill has shown the world how much hinges on the work of a team of robots, according to John Mair, global technology manager for the Scottish firm Subsea 7.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



No, that was a direct quote from what I said.  You simply are not worth the effort most of the time.  I was not discussing anything at all with you and I was not paying attention to the BS you typically spout.  

You really do need to work on your reading comprehension.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

CBC News - World - Transport Canada helps track Gulf oil spill


----------



## antagon (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



boa sub c and skandi neptune are subsea 7 vessels. these vessels have been operating in the area as of the image i posted which transpired a couple weeks ago.

edit: the neptune was among the first vessels to conduct undersea imaging by way of robotic submersible in april, and is at the center of the early scandal involving BPs claims that no oil was leaking at all.  furthermore, oceameering's fleet is norwegian laid and flagged.  subsea 7 is a caymans HQ'd international firm owned largely by halliburton.  scottish?

http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2010/top_kill_killed_again


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...



Not worth the effort, yet you put forth the effort.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

antagon said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



And  they are not Norwegian vessels.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

*Dutch to help in US oil spill clean up*

 				 					Published on 28 May 2010 - 8:49pm				 			

*The Netherlands has promised to  help the United States clean up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.*
 It will provide several so-called sweeping arms, which can be fixed  to the sides of ships. The arms are then used to suck the drifting oil  from the water and pump it on board. Depending on the condition of the  sea, each arm can sweep up to 350 cubic meters of oil per hour.
 The arms will be delivered by plane on Saturday to the US Coastguard.  Dutch experts will travel with them to help the US users with their  operation.
 The Dutch aid follows a Thursday afternoon US request to the European  Commission for assistance.

Dutch to help in US oil spill clean up | Radio Netherlands Worldwide


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> *Dutch to help in US oil spill clean up*
> 
> Published on 28 May 2010 - 8:49pm
> 
> ...




How much better off would we be if Obama had accepted this offer back in April?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > *Dutch to help in US oil spill clean up*
> ...



My point exactly.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > *Dutch to help in US oil spill clean up*
> ...


What was offered in April?


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




The Dutch offered 3 days after the rig blew to send in tankers w sweeper arms and our government declined the help.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...


Link?


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Steffy: U.S. and BP slow to accept Dutch expertise | Business: Loren Steffy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers


Nice partisan link.

I have read that Geert Visser claims to have offered and was refused but he has not provided any documentation. He has also claimed that the Jones Act is what prevented the help being taken. And yet the Jones Act only covers cargo transported _between_ American ports. His story sounds fishy to me.

Also notice that the Jones Act has not been waived and we are taking these sweepers.


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers
> ...




Are you kidding me? Google it for yourself if you don't like my link but wake up. We're taking the skimmer arms and using them with U.S ships because they can't seem to waive the Jones Act. Can you not set your admiration for Obama aside long enough to find the damned truth about his incompetence?

Go check the Houston Chon link if you don't want to find your own info.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...


Again, the Jones Act doesn't apply. The guy's story doesn't add up, imo.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



 The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (P.L. 66-261), also known as the Jones Act, the law requires essentially that all commercial acts conducted in U.S.-controlled waters be performed by U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents.

Jones Act 46 USCS - (Pre-2006)


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...


This wouldn't be a commercial act. And it also isn't *between* American ports...another requirement.

I bolded it for you that time cause I know you're a dope.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





That was a good effort, but for a few things.

A) if this isn't commerce then neither is healthcare insurance, which clearly OBama has declared is.

B) The entire gulf of Mexico in fact lies between two US ports.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




On the off chance that you aren't just trying to be funny...BETWEEN means making commercial deliveries between two or more American ports. For instance, they couldn't transport commercial goods (things to be sold) between the Port of New Orleans and the Port of Houston unless they sailed under the American flag.

It more and more sounds like this guy is trying to make the Dutch look good at our expense. The Jones Act doesn't apply. If it did, why would the Dutch object to complying with it? And in fact they are lending us the sweeping arms to attach to ships already in the Gulf, not supplying ships.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



but that isn't how the law reads and that isn't how it is interpreted. It has been interpreted as drawing a straight line from one port to another and anything above that line is considered to between two American ports. If they had meant inter port commerce, that is exactly what they have written.


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




I didn't bring up the Jones Act. You did. The Jones Act doesn't mean squat to me. All I want to know is why when the Dutch GOVERNMENT offered help 3 days after the rig exploded the Obama administration turned that help away. It is not a "guy's story". It was a documented offer that came through official government channels. You can guarantee that if it were NOT the case, then Robert Gibbs would be crying from the rooftops about the mean lies that are being spread. 

Do you find it acceptable that our government turned this help away and now we have oil washing up on the Gulf coasts and marshes? Are you good with this?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Explain why they're pushing Obama to waive the Jones Act and why Bush waived it after Katrina if it don't apply?

Florida&#8217;s Attorney General requests Obama to waive Jones act to hasten oil spill efforts  WireUpdate Local | Local Breaking News | Local Breaking Wire -

RealClearPolitics - Video - Gibbs Previews Obama's Address: No Jones Act, No Answer On Cap & Trade


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...




Easy, because it does.

_In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff temporarily waived the U.S. Shipping Act for foreign vessels carrying oil and natural gas from September 1 to September 19, 2005. _


Why would that need to be done? That hurricane hit in pretty much the same waters as this oil spill.


----------



## Intense (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers
> ...



Ravi, how far are you prepared to stretch this?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


No, you are simply wrong.

Educate yourself.

Jones Act


----------



## Ravi (Jun 15, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Vel6377 said:
> ...


The Dutch guy brought it up. It doesn't apply therefore his story doesn't add up.


----------



## The Infidel (Jun 15, 2010)

*NEVER LET A GOOD CRISIS GO TO WASTE.... *

The oilrig explosion is going to be the catylist that B.O. will use to advance cap and trade.

This is why the leak is going to continue, and The Jones Act wont be waived. (We need all the help we can get, and it was turned down.)


----------



## Vel (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Whatever, it's beside my point. Are you good with the fact that our government turned the proffered help away and now we have oil washing onto our shores and marshes?


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




IF you are right, and all of the rest of us are wrong, why then is the Administration claiming they haven't received any requests for waivers so that foreign ships can aid in the cleanup? Wouldn't they instead say "hey you don't need waivers, come on in?"


----------



## antagon (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



if you read ch24. § 883 of the act you would find that lonestar is bullshitting everyone when he pretends that the act summarily restricts 'all commercial acts'.  i couldn't imagine what would bring someone to lie about my country to look better on an internet message board.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 15, 2010)

antagon said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Well, lonestar in a loon so I've quit paying too much attention to him; BUT the Jones Act is obviously keeping foreign ships out of the gulf.


----------



## antagon (Jun 15, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...



seriously, read the act.  your chord between ports bit is pulled from an ass.  yours or someone else's.

the US, furthermore, is not interested in a foreign aid free-for-all right in the gulf of mexico.  something like that will likely never be endorsed.  thousands of vessels of foreign and domestic fleets are involved in cleaning, repair, containment, dredging and logistics.  'the US has it covered, thanks for the gracious offer of assistance' is about right.  that the jones act has not required a waiver as yet, despite all of the international vessels involved, only indicates that the act does not preclude the current extent of international commercial involvement, including the majority of vessels working on the foreign, broken rig.

how does that escape folks?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Maybe you'll believe these guys.

The Maritime Executive Magazine :: A MORAL OBLIGATION, NOT A LEGAL OBLIGATION, REQUIRES THE USE OF U.S. VESSELS IN GULF COAST OIL SPILL CLEANUP

Also, according to the White House there are currently 15 foreign vessels working in the Gulf.

This Dutch guy is full of shit as are the rightwingloon talking heads.


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 16, 2010)

The Dutch and The British offered to help with skimmers and both were turned down.


----------



## Mini 14 (Jun 16, 2010)

Folks, its all going to be water under the bridge soon enough. Obama's plan to power our country off rainbows and unicorns will take shape soon, and we'll all be so stinking rich that we'll just buy a new Gulf and move it here (I've always like Tonkin, if I get to have a say).

WTF did he say last night, other than "its BP's fault" and "I'm about to ram Cap and Trade down your throats"? 

Seriously, was there anything new? Any answers? Any details at all?

Just get me the rainbows and unicorns, and I'll be behind you 100%.


----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

A spy satellite picked this up from the oval office last night. 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zgeQmzV9kk]YouTube - Madness Visible[/ame]


----------



## Vel (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Maybe you'll believe these guys.
> 
> The Maritime Executive Magazine :: A MORAL OBLIGATION, NOT A LEGAL OBLIGATION, REQUIRES THE USE OF U.S. VESSELS IN GULF COAST OIL SPILL CLEANUP
> 
> ...




So what you're saying is that you're fine with the fact that our government turned down skimmer ships offered by the Dutch and now we have oil on the beaches and in the marshes of the Gulf coast.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Vel6377 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe you'll believe these guys.
> ...


No, I'm saying I don't believe the guy that says skimmer ships were turned down.


----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator George LeMieux (R-FL) today spoke on FOX News and MSNBC voicing his concerns over the lack of skimmers coming to the Gulf to aid in the cleanup efforts. LeMieux, who just returned from the Gulf on Friday, is in Pensacola again today and Tuesday to meet with President Obama and Admiral Thad Allen. LeMieux will encourage President Obama to waive portions of the Jones Act, which would immediately allow international skimmers in the Gulf.

"We need as much help as we can get in cleaning up the Gulf" LeMieux said. "There is no reason why every single skimmer vessel should not be heading to the Gulf to skim the oil. Preventing the oil from washing ashore and creating even more damage is what we need to be focused on in the next few weeks."

BACKGROUND: The Jones Act provides a federal framework for maritime labor relations and contains provisions requiring ships working in U.S. waters to be U.S. built, owned and operated. Jones Act waivers are administrative decisions that allow the use of vessels and shipping situations that wouldn't normally be legal under the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. One recent example of a waiver of the act occurred in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

If oil is witnessed coming ashore, citizens should immediately contact the Deepwater Horizon Response Line at 866-557-1401. Constituents seeking help with issues related to the incident can call the senator's office directly and toll-free at (866) 630-7106. A website has been established for citizens to receive up-to-date information on the event at Unified Command for the BP Oil Spill | Deepwater Horizon Response. British Petroleum has set up a Florida specific site to monitor the Oil Spill. You can access pertinent information here Florida Gulf Response. The following is a link to the State Emergency Operations Center. They are actively monitoring the Deepwater Horizon Response as well as providing precautionary tips for residents and visitors. Florida Division of Emergency Management - State Emergency Operations Center.

New Sen. LeMieux to POTUS: Remove Bureaucracy and Send More Skimmers to Gulf Disaster


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Apparently he is stupid enough to believe rightwingloons.



> The Mexican offer of two skimmers and 13,780 feet of boom and  Norways offer of eight skimming systems were accepted in early May,  according to the State Department. The Dutch offer of three sets of  Koseq Rigid Sweeping Arms was accepted on May 23 and Canadas offer of  9,843 feet of containment boom was accepted on June 4, the department  said in a statement yesterday.
> 
> 
> Asked why the US has not accepted more international offers of  assistance, the State Department has said that the size and distance of  those items plays a role, but also whether any cost is associated.
> For the most part, they are offers to sell supplies. And in  determining whether to accept these offers, we look at the availability  of domestic sources and also, you know, compare pricing on the open  market, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley told reporters.



US Searches for Oil Cleanup Aid Abroad, Two Notices Sent Worldwide Since Spill Began - Political Punch


----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

Monday, 14 June 2010  
A device that can &#8220;harvest&#8221; an oil spill in open seas or in a marsh &#8211; much like a combine harvests wheat and eliminates the chaff &#8211; sits as a working concept model at the LSU AgCenter in Baton Rouge.

The brainchild of Chandra Theegala, a civil and environmental engineer who has taught fluid mechanics for years, now waits for sufficient resources to bring the concept model to a full-blown working prototype.

Theegala, an associate professor in the LSU AgCenter Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, developed the idea in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April.


Theegala&#8217;s invention uses a boom to skim surface oil and water through a positive displacement pump and into a container where the oil and water separate naturally. The oil floats up through a pipe into a collection vessel while the water goes another direction and is discharged back to where it came from.


&#8220;It relies on the principles of density difference between the two liquids in a u-tube and has no moving parts other than the pump,&#8221; Theegala said.


&#8220;It works with a commercially available, engine-powered diaphragm pump,&#8221; Theegala said. &#8220;Unlike other types of pumps that emulsify the oil, the diaphragm pump keeps the oil floating on the water. It works in an up-and-down motion &#8211; like chest compression in CPR.&#8221;


Theegala&#8217;s initial concept model can pump about 4,000 gallons of an oil-water-air mixture per hour. &#8220;A fully working model could handle 10 times that volume,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The material cost on this concept unit is around $7,000 and includes the pontoon unit and the pump.&#8221;


Theegala&#8217;s concept includes a V-shaped boom that would direct floating oil into the end of the V, where suction from the pump would draw the mixture into the device. &#8220;It&#8217;s like harvesting oil,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The oil would be collected in a sack that would float and be collected by a mother ship when it&#8217;s full.&#8221;


The device would be portable enough to be mounted on a small boat, carried to floating oil on a larger boat, and then lowered into the water where it would begin to do its work.


&#8220;It&#8217;s just like vacuuming your carpet,&#8221; Theegala said. &#8220;You follow the oil and suck it up. And you can go back and get what you missed.


&#8220;I am confident it will work,&#8221; Theegala said of the concept model. &#8220;We need to get the word out that we have a low-cost technology that can help in marshes and near an oil rig.&#8221;


The inventor sees the technology having applications for shallow marshes and near rigs.


For the marsh locations, the unit would sit up higher, be lighter and even be mounted on a motor boat. It would have a 1- to 2-inch-diameter vacuum hose, almost like a residential home vacuum cleaner, Theegala said.


&#8220;These units can be handed to hundreds of fishermen, who can mount them on their boats and clean up the marshes,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Like bees, each may not bring in a lot, but collectively it can be huge.&#8221;


For &#8220;near rig&#8221; applications, the skimmer would be mounted on an engine-powered pontoon boat that would have a front-end, fixed-V boom that would channel all the oil to the bottom tip of the V while being driven through an oil plume.


&#8220;There will be no need for adding any chemical dispersants, and the collected oil would be pure enough for processing,&#8221; Theegala said. &#8220;Once the floating bags are full, they can be emptied or switched out. A large mother ship can collect all the oil from several skimmers.&#8221;


A small prototype made in Theegala&#8217;s lab works as planned with 2 to 3 gallons of oil. &#8220;But as far as the real thing, we can only say it&#8217;s still to be tested in the open ocean. If you have pure crude oil, I am almost 100 percent certain it will work. But if chemicals are added, that changes the flow and density. That&#8217;s a different story.&#8221;


Theegala said he learned two things from a recent trip to Grand Isle, where the concept model was tested.


&#8220;One, the pontoon unit is more than sea-ready and rides like a pro,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The three- to-four-foot waves did not bother it, and it was stable. Two, for an open ocean unit, I definitely need a V boom in place of the straight boom on the test model.


&#8220;I clearly see a need for steering the running/sucking skimmer unit through a streak of oil,&#8221; Theegala said. 

&#8220;Basically, you drive it like a whale with its mouth open and collect oil at the tip of the V. The best part is it can take in any combination of water, oil and air and deliver them from three different ports.&#8221;


The final hurdle, Theegala said, is finding the resources to develop a full prototype on a fast track to get skimmers into the Gulf and marshes. His model is currently positioned in the Gulf awaiting help from an agency or company that has the capabilities to test it in floating oil, he said.


&#8220;Dr. Theegala has worked very hard in a short period of time to get this designed, built and tested,&#8221; said David Boethel, vice chancellor and director of research for the LSU AgCenter. &#8220;I hope he is successful.&#8221;

nwlanews.com - Your home for news in Bossier and Webster Parishes


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Maybe you'll believe these guys.
> 
> The Maritime Executive Magazine :: A MORAL OBLIGATION, NOT A LEGAL OBLIGATION, REQUIRES THE USE OF U.S. VESSELS IN GULF COAST OIL SPILL CLEANUP
> 
> ...



That guy says the Jones Act doesn't apply, but then he goes on to detail that a waiver is needed for foreign vessels to participate in the cleanup, but he doesn't say exactly what that waiver waves. How odd............


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Please quit spamming the thread Intense. Next I expect you to post Terral's white paper.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe you'll believe these guys.
> ...


It would only apply to three miles out from the coast. And no, you read it incorrectly.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Apparently he is stupid enough to believe rightwingloons.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not to belittle the offer of aid from anyone, because I for one am appreciative of any aid we can get on this, but 10 skimmers, 3 sweeping arms and 24,000 feet of boom hardly seems sufficient in this case.

I know we have our own, but when you think of the vast area that is affected by this spill seeing numbers like that is nothing short of frightening.




Intense said:


> Monday, 14 June 2010
> A device that can &#8220;harvest&#8221; an oil spill in open seas or in a marsh &#8211; much like a combine harvests wheat and eliminates the chaff &#8211; sits as a working concept model at the LSU AgCenter in Baton Rouge.
> 
> The brainchild of Chandra Theegala, a civil and environmental engineer who has taught fluid mechanics for years, now waits for sufficient resources to bring the concept model to a full-blown working prototype.
> ...



Okay, for the record, some where back in this thread, I made a comment about President Obama believing we could process the oil taken out of the sea into fuel oil and that was why he was so arrogantly turning down foreign aid.  I was, in fact, only joking about that.  I had no knowledge of this device nor do I believe that President Obama would really be THAT arrogant, greedy or foolish.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently he is stupid enough to believe rightwingloons.
> ...



There are probably lots of things out there on people's drawing boards that would work...problem being there is never a market for them until something like this happens. We aren't exactly a group of people that ties up taxpayer's money on what-ifs, sadly. It would have been great if in addition to making oil companies drill relief wells along with the actual well that we also had an entire fleet of ships standing by in case of an accident.

But that would be socialism or communism of fascism or some such nonsense.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


But, politicians  are willing to tie up tax payers money on unproven alternative energy at a grand scale.


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



For the record, my point was that when I earlier made the comment that the President was refusing to allow other nations to help was because he had visions of refining that oil and actually using it was a joke.  I was not insinuating that he was only concerned with the wealth the oil would provide either for him or the nation..  

I was joking about that, but I don't think that was or is what is on his mind.  Sure, if the oil swept out of the gulf could in some way be processed that would be better than losing all of it, but I was only joking about the President's motives.  I am sure the President is as concerned about the environmental impact this is having and will have on the world as the rest of us are.

Immie


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


 Unproven? I realize this is a red herring on your part but I know several people that use solar and or/wind power, drive hybrid cars, cut down on their electrical usage, etc. How is conserving and using alternate sources unproven? It certainly cuts down on the need for oil.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Immanuel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...


 For not trying to say something you sure are repeating it often enough. Maybe you should start a thread in the conspiracy theory forum. 

btw...doesn't the oil belong to BP?


----------



## Immanuel (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



What? Just because you didn't seem to pick up what I was saying?  You're reply to my post was way out in left field.  I was simply trying to clarify the point.

No, it does not belong to BP... look up "salvage rights" when you get a chance.  I'm sure those rights would apply in this situation.

Immie


----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Please quit spamming the thread Intense. Next I expect you to post Terral's white paper.



The second post was not even political in any perspective Ravi. Had you bothered to read it you would have known that. You presume much.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Intense said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Please quit spamming the thread Intense. Next I expect you to post Terral's white paper.
> ...


I did read it...which is why I made the comment about Terral.

How does not being political mean it isn't spam?


----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Why don't you start a Fantasy and Fairy Tale Forum where you can rightly praise Obama's  incompetence and transform his impotence into a Super Power???


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)




----------



## Intense (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


>



You could have a thread devoted to yourself on that forum too!  

"The Princess And The Pea".  

The opening post could read something like " La La La La La.... I can't hear you!!!"


----------



## Valerie (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Immanuel said:
> ...





I was thinking that each of the respective states should have set up a process whereby local fisherman could sign up in advance to be commissioned in the case of an emergency.  Each governor of each state considered "at risk" could preventatively assign permits to the local fleets via some sort of coast guard emergency training so when a catastrophe occurs everyone already knows who is who and what's what and they are already permitted to proceed accordingly without bureaucratic delays.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Valerie said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


Now that's just sensible. 

Perhaps it will happen now since this disaster serves as a wake up call.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Of course you missed the part of *GRAND SCALE*.  Hybrid cars are from the private sector, Ravi, not tax payers money.  Wind power still the same...private sector, they work in some areas but not most. Solar on a large scale......just don't see it happening.  You forgot all about your good buddies the environmentalists that would keep all your solutions in courts for years to come with litigation.....just sayin...


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


Still not getting your point. Are you one of those that thought the space race was a waste of money?


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Of course your not getting my point, Ravi, that's expected.  Your saying that we don't tie up tax payers money with "what if's", I'm saying we most certainly do.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


We should in this case...both having the readiness to deal with disasters and also the spending on alternative fuel sources.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



You are correct.....but where is the money going to come from with the alternative fuels?  We just don't have it with our debt growing atronomically everyday, Ravi.  When is too much spending going to mean too much spending with politicians?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Personally, I'd love to see us leave Afghanistan and Iraq in the dust and concentrate on our own problems.


----------



## Samson (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Personally, I'd love to see us leave Afghanistan and Iraq in the dust and concentrate on our own problems.



So, you think Obama should have recalled all troops from A & I to prevent financial and ecological catastrophes?

Topicallity Gods are Frowning in your General Direction.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Yes.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Yes.



I doubt the money saved would ever go to these two projects that you listed, Ravi.  But....the money would be spent.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Personally, I'd love to see us leave Afghanistan and Iraq in the dust and concentrate on our own problems.



As would we all, but that isn't an option at this point.

Let me ask you seriously, do you think there is ANYONE , outside of the oil industry anyway, who wouldn't love to see us develop the mythical green energy?

Do you know that with the money Obama spent on healthcare he could have bought 3.8M hybrids? Now let's assume for a moment that he decided to make that investment again to this project. Do you know what percentage of gas vehicles that would take off the road? here's a clue, there are 240M registered vehicles in the United States, in other words not even a dent. 

You do realize that money is finite right?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Do you realize that everything can't be fixed in one fell swoop and yet it can be fixed? This is the defeatist attitude that I hate about Republicans in general. Someone mentions conserving energy and the dopes laugh and giggle about going back to horse and buggy days. 

What is wrong with you people, seriously?


----------



## Samson (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> You do realize that money is finite right?



Apparently you haven't heard of the printing press?


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Do you realize that everything can't be fixed in one fell swoop and yet it can be fixed? This is the defeatist attitude that I hate about Republicans in general. Someone mentions conserving energy and the dopes laugh and giggle about going back to horse and buggy days.
> 
> What is wrong with you people, seriously?



Again.....I have to ask you where the money is going to come from?
Lets be real here, Ravi.  No one is laughing at conserving energy, I think most people do the best they can at conserving energy.  But, what your asking will cost trillions, and right now there is no way to pay it.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Do you realize that everything can't be fixed in one fell swoop and yet it can be fixed? This is the defeatist attitude that I hate about Republicans in general. Someone mentions conserving energy and the dopes laugh and giggle about going back to horse and buggy days.
> ...


Valarie had a good idea up the thread about training shrimpers and fisherman with boats. I think pulling out of the ongoing wars in the middle east will save money. Make the oil companies ACTUALLY pay their royalties. Put the speed limit back to 55 mph. I'm sure there are plenty of ways to fund research and create jobs.

As demand for solar energy goes up, prices come down. Simple free market stuff.

What's the alternative? Buying gas from nations that fund terrorists and screwing up our own country.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Do you realize that everything can't be fixed in one fell swoop and yet it can be fixed? This is the defeatist attitude that I hate about Republicans in general. Someone mentions conserving energy and the dopes laugh and giggle about going back to horse and buggy days.
> 
> What is wrong with you people, seriously?



Dude, I own a hybrid, I have solar heating on my pool, my home has all energy star compliant appliances, we  converted to a tankless hot water heater. We put all new energy efficient windows in our home. My wife and I also make over $100K/year and can afford some of these things. We are far from the norm. You are willing to destroy people financially in order to get what you want here?

Seriously, when you go to wal mart to go shopping do you buy things you can't afford simply becasue hey, i might need this in ten years? Of course you don't. What part of our government HAS to stop the deficit spending are you not understanding? What part of $8/gal gasoline will destroy lower middle class and poor working americans lives do you not understand? 

Plus ,  you are not even considering the added cost of EVERY item if gas goes up that much, Your $3/Gal mile, will go to $5, your $4/lb hamburger to $7. It's just siimple economics. And that is just talking about gas prices, what about other petroleum based products? Do you REALLY think that big business is just going to eat the added cost? Hell no they aren't , they are going to pass the added costs onto you and me.

There's lots of things I would love to have, my little sports car is a 1996 model F355 spider, I would love to upgrade to a 2010 F430 but I look at my checkbook and tell myself that it just isn't feasible at THIS time and so I don't buy it.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I was asking about keeping it real, I have failed in keeping it real.  Free market has it's hands in solar energy.....people aren't buying into it for a number of reasons, Ravi.  The same with wind energy...there are reasons for it.  I don't think we're going to isolate ourselves from the world anytime soon, so just throw that one out.  I'm sorry but the oil companies are in the back pockets of nearly every politician, so we can throw that one out also.
We have to buy oil from the middle east, or we can drill our own oil on land and shallow water.  It was your environmentalist buddies that forced the deep water drilling, let's all look and see how that worked out.  We could go with more nuclear energy, but again your buddies closed that down.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> What part of $8/gal gasoline will destroy lower middle class and poor working americans lives do you not understand?


What part of destroying the economy of four or five states do YOU not understand? Why am I subsidizing your right to have cheap gas at the expense of my state?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


Sigh...obviously you can't get past your own blinders. No one forced anyone to do deep water drilling. Oil companies are going to drill where ever they can, as much as they can, and for as long as they can.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Let's just destroy our damn economy.
There will be no middle class, there will be a few rich and powerful, and then there will be the rest of us sucking off the teet of our government.  Let the good times roll, Ravi.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Ravi, if an oil company has the choice between a land site, a shallow water site, or a deep water size, the LAST choice they will make is the deep water site, BUT if they are given a choice of a deep water site, or NO site, well of course they are going to choose the deep water site.  They are after all in business to make money.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Let's just destroy our damn economy.
> There will be no middle class, there will be a few rich and powerful, and then there will be the rest of us sucking off the teet of our government.  Let the good times roll, Ravi.


There's that defeatist attitude again. 

No one wants to destroy the economy.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


The abundance of yet to be drilled shallow water drilling sites proves you wrong.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Let's just destroy our damn economy.
> ...



You better wake up my friend. Obama certainly does want to destroy the economy b/c then he can step in as the conquering hero and implement his socialist utopia. Don't believe that is not true, not for a moment.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



You do realize that land sites and shallow water sites are off limits in the US , yes?


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Hopefully this will clarify what I meant

WASHINGTON Here's my question: Why are we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?
Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Oil spill culprits run deep | obama, oil, deep - Opinion - The Orange County Register


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

What *SHOULD* The President have done?

I can only say what _*I*_ would have done...

On April 21st or 22nd I'd have gathered the executives of BP, Transocean and Halliburton and said something to the effect of "Dudes... You fucked up.  Thanks for the $25 million campaign contribution, but you guys screwed the pooch on this one no matter what the actual cause turns out to be.  You have 7 days to make at least the appearance of an AWESOME job of teamwork arresting this cluster-fuck or I'm going to insist that you sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up and get out your check books to pay for a military response."

Then I would have said "Yeah, yeah... have your lawyers call the US attorneys office in Baton Rouge, there is where you will be picking the jury to judge you.  Now, sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up and get out your check books."

But that's just me.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


There are plenty of shallow water sites that are not off limits.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


Opinions and rightwing talking points are not facts.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Ravi, you have avoided this question the entire thread. Answer. What about your fellow Americans who simply could in noway afford a life of $8/Gal gasoline? Fuck them?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


What about the people that live on the probably destroyed Gulf coast? Fuck them?

I think that people can find a way around spending as much on gas by car pooling, riding the bus, etc. A little hurt for a couple of years is nothing compared to decades of sludge in the Gulf of Mexico. Not even mentioning the funding of countries that support terrorism by buying their oil.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



That's real nice if you live where mass transit in an option. Where I live it isn't. Some people live an hour from work. You're being selfish and irresponsible. 

Fuck the people on the gulf coast? Hasn't BP just agreed to spend $20B to clean up that mess and take care of people?


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> What *SHOULD* The President have done?
> 
> I can only say what _*I*_ would have done...
> 
> ...



Better late than never, eh?

20 Billion... Good start.  Late, but good.​


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > What *SHOULD* The President have done?
> ...




I honestly would have told Obama to fuck off. I would have wrote him a check for $75M ant told him good luck cleaning the mess up since you are the ones who told us we had to go to 5000 ' of water when we wanted to drill in 500' and now you're being a fucking prick for political reasons., AND $75M is the limit set by Congress. Sue me for the rest you fucktard


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Actually, you're the one being selfish and irresponsible. Your selfishness is destroying the Gulf of Mexico.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...


Why do you lie so much?


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



well the incompetent nincompoop you voted for just ensured that we will remain dependent on terrorist oil for the next couple of decades.. obie wan is an asswipe who just put 20,000 people out of work.


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



he's not lying, just cause you don't want to hear it doesn't mean he's lying.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Not even LA is claiming that nonsense. Get your talking points straight, dope.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



oh brother......sorry, Ravi, facts are facts no matter which side it come from.  Doesn't mean they aren't true


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



Part of me, the part that loves disaster for its anarchy based entertainment value, kind of wishes BP, et al. had done just that.

It can be kind of cool when leadership fails and a big enough group of people get fucked over.  Hasn't happened here in a long while... 

Credit to leadership?  Perhaps... Perhaps not.  

A LOT fewer folks are heading toward 'frustrated to the point of leaving the couch' since Obama coerced a 20 Billion promise and an apology from the _people_ hiding behind the corporate shield.


----------



## WillowTree (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



what planet do you live on again?


http://www.thefoxnation.com/business/2010/06/04/obama-drilling-ban-costing-thousands-jobs


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I see, destroy the economy....that's exactly what your saying, Ravi.  Although, you won't admit that is exactly what would happen.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


There are still shallow wells being drilled in the gulf. That there are deepwater wells is not because we won't let shallow ones be drilled but it is because the technology has allowed the oil companies to go deeper and deeper into the gulf.

This is pretty basic stuff. Quit listening to Palin...your brain cells are dying.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



And your selfishness would destroy our country's economy.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



Ravi doesn't care about those 20,000 employees, nor does s/he care about the millions who's financial lives will be destroyed if oil suddenly skyrockets to $250/barrel. 

As long as s/he can say "look I care more about the environment than those mean old conservatives who do stupid things like oh look at financial reality, someone pass the chocolate covered unicorn dust"

Fucking stupid ass 2010 versions of 60's hippies. No smarter, no more engaged in reality, just smell a little better.


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

What should have Obama done?

Gotten the HELL out of the way, waived the rules and gotten a handle on this...but Noooo...It was another oppritunity to demonize another industry...and demand another piece of the Statist puzzle be put in place as Cap N'Tax...another in a long series of job killers.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

WillowTree said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...


20,000 if the moratorium lasts eighteen months. Boo fucking hoo. The moratorium is six months. 20,000 is nothing compared to the amount of people that will be put out of work if the spill travels to Florida and beyond.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Wrong. The spill has the potential to destroy the economy. Conserving and finding different fuels does not.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Excuse me!!!!!!!!!!  Quit reading Solon.com....sheesh.  Show some damn facts that we are actually drilling shallow water, or land for that matter.
If you really want to get insulting...please continue....I have a ton of insults for you


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



You are wrong on this Ravi, I think you know I'm pretty good at finding facts and I will eventually find a link online, but the truth is BP asked for and got permission from LA to drill 500' from shore and THREE times the federal government denied their application and told them to drill at 5000 feet. Obviously this mess would have been so much easier to clean up at 500 ' than 5000'.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



You have proven you haven't a clue about this, Ravi


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


You're so stupid. You think the environment is turtles and shrimp...it isn't...it is people, too. 

Must be nice to sit so far away from the Gulf in your ivory tower and look down on the possible destruction of the economies of four states while you laugh and pretend only a few pelicans will suffer.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> WillowTree said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...





Let's say only 5,000 people lose their jobs because of the moratorium. explain to me how those 5,000 people losing their jobs helps the Gulf get cleaned up faster in anyway?

And I'm pretty sure those 5000 families aren't sitting around going "oh boo, guess we'll just have to suck it up"

Ravi, you have officially moved down on my list from misguided but generally fair minded to full on fucking idiot. Congratulations.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Shallow-water drilling companies unite to lobby regulators | NewsWatch: Energy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


Yes, you will have to find this link.

Why would shallow well drillers have a lobby that is having a fit against the new regulations of there was no shallow drilling?


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


 
While we subsidize Brazil drilling...and allow others to come in and take what is ours...I wonder if these Enviro-Whackos will be sorry to see the rigs sail away into the Sunset...as a once proud Republic walks into the same Sunset?


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > WillowTree said:
> ...



What you fucking loon? Are you kidding me you actually post in one post that you are fine with between 5-20000 people losing their jobs and then you have the nerve to pretend that you care more about people than those of us who actually do care? Are you that fucking stupid? Rhetorical question, don't even bother answering.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



From your own site, Ravi:

The group also notes that *shallow-water wells in the Gulf of Mexico, once drilled, are predominantly natural gas providers --* making them less risky from an environmental point of view. 
Shallow-water drilling companies unite to lobby regulators | NewsWatch: Energy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


 
Why the regulations that aren't being observed anyway? Those that serve to strangle productivity? And riddle me this? After last night's little talking down to by the Messiah?

Didn't it strike you as a bit deja-vu from 33 years ago, and Carter as he stated we needed to find alternative sources of energy? Yet here we are?

But I guess NO good crisis can go to waste. Where Carter failed? Obama means to cross the final _t _on the Dea*t*h cer_*t*_ifica_*t*_e of this Republic and it's economy.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


You realize BP is "others", right?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


So there's your answer...the environmentalists didn't force deep water drilling. The oil companies drill wherever they can find oil.

You're welcome.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


No we aren't there yet. Mostly because people are shortsighted and can't see beyond the end of their noses.

How many more terrorist attacks or spewing wells will it take before you actually give a damn about anything but the oil companies?


----------



## Samson (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



I wish I didn't have to comb through the entire thread to read Ravi's Energy Policy.

Could you give it to me, reader's digest version?


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


 
Sure I do. Why stick around when you are about to be destroyed by rogue Statists that mean to take you down? Free Enterprise really bothers Statists...therefore they must _destroy them_ by whatever means they can.

Obama is doing a damned fine job. MORE businesses will go off shore...to friendlier climes...as WE sink into a mere shadow of what we once were...

Kinda makes a Statist all warm and fuzzy...doesn't it?


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



WTF?  Natural gas is not oil, Ravi.  This is an epic fail on your behalf.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Just so you know, Judge Neapolitano got the information about BP being denied a waiver to drill at 500' from a FOIA request and I can't find the information online, I have however emailed him, hopefully he responds and you can see that once again you are wrong.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > The T said:
> ...


Okay, you've gone over the edge. Nice talking to you.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Dude that fail was minor in comparison to the earlier hilarity of saying boo hoo about at least 5000 oil workers losing their jobs through no fault of their own and then turning right around and accusing others of not caring about people. That has to be at least in the top5 epic fails in the history of the internet.


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


 
Nope Observations...I beg to differ. I am a capitalist...Free Market Republic type...But yet you seem to applaud Obama taking out industry...especially when things happen...

I suggest that it is YOU that is on the preface of falling.


----------



## Jeremy (Jun 16, 2010)

The only reason BP still has any control over the situation is their on-the-record support for cap and tax and large contributions to Obama's presidential campaign. BP is a statist loving corperation.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > The T said:
> ...



On the preface my ass, that crazy bitch jumped off head first about 10 posts ago when she claimed to care more about people than I do then turned right around and said too bad about between 5 and 20 thousand people losing their jobs.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

No fail.

Shallow well drilling just doesn't yield as much oil anymore. It has nothing to do with environmentalists. I personally would like to smack your heads together for repeating this lie...but I realize you can't help yourselves because the talking points have been issued.


> The EIA estimates "a vast majority" of projected  increases in U.S. production in the near term will come from Gulf  deepwater fields similar to the site of the Deepwater Horizon spill,  which currently represent about 70 percent of all Gulf oil production.  This share is expected to grow in the next few years. A 2009 U.S.  Minerals Management Service (MMS) report forecasting  production (PDF) in the Gulf of Mexico shows that as shallow-water  production levels have fallen, deepwater production has taken up the  slack.
> 
> What is driving the industry to pursue  deepwater projects?
> 
> The upward trend in deepwater Gulf projects  is mirrored around the world as oil companies look for new sources of  production amid higher oil prices and growing global demand. Many older  wells are experiencing production decline and new finds are often more  expensive to extract and harder to refine, which some environmental and  energy experts say heralds the end to  cheap and easy oil (McClatchy). Production from unconventional  sources such as oil sands is on the rise, and deepwater drilling is  considered one of the last frontiers in oil exploration. Oil investment  analyst D. Barry  McKennitt said the only reason anyone is willing to drill in  deepwater with the depths, temperatures, and other significant technical  challenges is that other opportunities are closed. "They don't do it  just for exercise," he said.


U.S. Deepwater Drilling's Future - Council on Foreign Relations

And there's always the better profits with deep well drilling.


> For investors seeking a sweet spot in the oil patch, it is hard to beat  the deep-water drilling companies. For the next couple of years, Diamond  will benefit from rising rates and nearly full utilization. The company  has retrofitted rigs coming into service at higher rates, and existing  contracts are being renewed at higher rates. Supply in the industry is  constricted by the $700 million price tag and three- to four-year lead  times for a new rig, combined with conservative operators who have been  burned in the past from adding capacity too quickly. If you are  interested in investing in this sector, shares are quite volatile,  meaning there should be multiple  opportunities to pick up shares at a discount. The next time Diamond  swoons, you might just see me in the trading pits adding to my position.


Deep Profits in Deep-Water Drilling (DO)


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


No fault of their own...well, they did choose to work in a dinosaur industry.

These are also theoretical jobs, btw.


----------



## Jeremy (Jun 16, 2010)

The true reason BHO implimented the moritorium is the fact he is an Enviro-Statist. Plain and simple. 

Levin says it best...

"If nature has "intrinsic value" than nature exists for its own sake. Consequently, man is not to be preferred over any aspect of his natural surroundings. He is no better than any other organism and much worse than most because of his destructive existence. And so it is that the Enviro-Statist abandons reason for a faith that preaches human regression and self-loathing. And he does so by claiming the moral high ground-saving man from himself and nature from man. Most individuals who are sympathetic to environmental causes are unwitiing marks, responsive to the Enviro-Statist's  manipulation of science, imagery, and language. Over time they self-surrender liberty for authority, abundance for scarcity, and optimism for pessimism. "Save the planet!" is the rallying cry that justifies nearly any intrusion by government into the life of the individual. The individual, after all, is expendable."


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Ravi, if i punched you in the jaw would it break Obama's cock? I think it would.


Theoretical jobs in a dinosaur industry? So, to reiterate, the only people you care about are the ones that meet your approved conditions.... Hmmm there was a guy who thought like that once, what was his name.... Oh that's right FUCKING HITLER.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Ravi........get back to reality .....please.  This dinosaur industry runs the entire world, and we will always need petroleum.  There is nothing dinosaur about it.  But, please feel free not to drive, fly, bus, or buy or use anything plastic, such as:
Solvents 
 Diesel fuel 
 Motor Oil 
 Bearing Grease 

Ink 
 Floor Wax 
 Ballpoint Pens 
 Football Cleats 

Upholstery 
 Sweaters 
 Boats 
 Insecticides 

Bicycle Tires 
 Sports Car Bodies 
 Nail Polish 
 Fishing lures 

Dresses 
 Tires 
 Golf Bags 
 Perfumes 

Cassettes 
 Dishwasher parts 
 Tool Boxes 
 Shoe Polish 

Motorcycle Helmet 
 Caulking 
 Petroleum Jelly 
 Transparent Tape 

CD Player 
 Faucet Washers 
 Antiseptics 
 Clothesline 

Curtains 
 Food Preservatives 
 Basketballs 
 Soap 

Vitamin Capsules 
 Antihistamines 
 Purses 
 Shoes 

Dashboards 
 Cortisone 
 Deodorant 
 Footballs 

Putty 
 Dyes 
 Panty Hose 
 Refrigerant 

Percolators 
 Life Jackets 
 Rubbing Alcohol 
 Linings 

Skis 
 TV Cabinets 
 Shag Rugs 
 Electrician's Tape 

Tool Racks 
 Car Battery Cases 
 Epoxy 
 Paint 

Mops 
 Slacks 
 Insect Repellent 
 Oil Filters 

Umbrellas 
 Yarn 
 Fertilizers 
 Hair Coloring 

Roofing 
 Toilet Seats 
 Fishing Rods 
 Lipstick 

Denture Adhesive 
 Linoleum 
 Ice Cube Trays 
 Synthetic Rubber 

Speakers 
 Plastic Wood 
 Electric Blankets 
 Glycerin 

Tennis Rackets 
 Rubber Cement 
 Fishing Boots 
 Dice 

Nylon Rope 
 Candles 
 Trash Bags 
 House Paint 

Water Pipes 
 Hand Lotion 
 Roller Skates 
 Surf Boards 

Shampoo 
 Wheels 
 Paint Rollers 
 Shower Curtains 

Guitar Strings 
 Luggage 
 Aspirin 
 Safety Glasses 

Antifreeze 
 Football Helmets 
 Awnings 
 Eyeglasses 

Clothes 
 Toothbrushes 
 Ice Chests 
 Footballs 

Combs 
 CD's & DVD's 
 Paint Brushes 
 Detergents 

Vaporizers 
 Balloons 
 Sun Glasses 
 Tents 

Heart Valves 
 Crayons 
 Parachutes 
 Telephones 

Enamel 
 Pillows 
 Dishes 
 Cameras 

Anesthetics 
 Artificial Turf 
 Artificial limbs 
 Bandages 

Dentures 
 Model Cars 
 Folding Doors 
 Hair Curlers 

Cold cream 
 Movie film 
 Soft Contact lenses 
 Drinking Cups 

Fan Belts 
 Car Enamel 
 Shaving Cream 
 Ammonia 

Refrigerators 
 Golf Balls 
 Toothpaste 
 Gasoline 
http://www.ranken-energy.com/Products from Petroleum.htm

Now don't you feel a little foolish?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

ConHog said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Okay, you've lost it, too. Come back when you are less hysterical.

I care about my state...you care about your "right" to guzzle gas.

Enjoy.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...





I would have thought she would have hours ago.


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> No fail.
> 
> Shallow well drilling just doesn't yield as much oil anymore. It has nothing to do with environmentalists. I personally would like to smack your heads together for repeating this lie...but I realize you can't help yourselves because the talking points have been issued.
> 
> ...



You have shown nothing, no one is saying they don't have the technology for deep well drilling.  Our government has closed shallow water drilling to areas where there are proven reserves.


----------



## Jeremy (Jun 16, 2010)

If it wasn't for petrol you idiots wouldn't have any asphalt roads to drive your hydrogen cars on, come to think of it, the car wouldn't have tires, could not contain any plastics, would be without most lubricants, saftey film over the windshield to protect your goatee from from the crash you get into when you drop your one-hitter, electronic parts so you can listen to your mp3's of last nights John "Stewart" Lebowitz show... on and on....


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Well cookie, I hate to be the one who brings an adult fact to your childish life BUT I have as much of a "right" to burn gas as you do to root for 20,000 dinosaurs to lose their jobs so that you can fly around in your unicorn tear powered jet pack while millions of your fellow Americans starve to death because they can't even afford to drive to work, well they won't starve I'm sure Comrade Obama will use some of the money his planning on straight up jacking from oil companies to expand food stamps. 

The question is why do you hate the working class and feel they should support the lazy ? 

I tell you honestly this won't affect me too greatly, I can afford it, sure the Ferrari won't get out much, but it doesn't really anyway b/c it's hugely expensive to maintain but I could manage, but I'm fortunate, most don't have the resources I have , what about them? See you idiots claim that conservatives have no compassion and then you turn right around and show no compassion. Just unbelievable.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > No fail.
> ...


Link?


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > No fail.
> ...


 
Not to mention land-locked ones that were capped under Jimah Catah during the Embargo of the 1970's...we still aren't allowed to exploit those...not to mention other areas in the Rockies that have shown promise...

Face it? WE were indeed driven offshore into precarious, almost impossible conditions...an accident happens...that is RARE...and it's NO Soup [OIL] For you America! Enjoy your unproven expensive alternatives. We'll leave it for others to dip their straws into...


----------



## Jeremy (Jun 16, 2010)

Interesting fact. Did you know the US is only ranked 23rd in the world when it comes to oil consumption per capita.


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Jeremy said:


> Interesting fact. Did you know the US is only ranked 23rd in the world when it comes to oil consumption per capita.


 
Playing Devil's advocate here? Who's first? China? India and their emerging economies?


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



The crying shame of the events of 04/20/10, eleven senseless deaths notwithstanding, is that we apparently *have* the technology to make deep water drilling just like Elton John's "Rocket Man":  _'just a job... five days a week...'_. 

Ass-u-me-ing that is that the contractor is told by the oil company that "rough spankings will ensue if anyone is ever caught installing a blow-out preventer without batteries", instead of "Psssssssssttttt.  There's an extra $10 million if you cut some corners and get production running by Tuesday".


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

Samson said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > The T said:
> ...



*That's* no fun!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aVbJhg23Ao]YouTube - Getting to Know You from The King and I[/ame]


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Here's to a $20 *B*illion corporate spanking administered by "We, The People".  
May the legal entity on this planet known as 'Corporation' take note.  ​


----------



## The T (Jun 16, 2010)

Meister said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


Seems some of these hypocrites need to get the Hell off their computers as well...and YES ravi and the rest of you Statist Morons? That means YOU. 

You may cease living a normal life as well...and go back to washing your clothing at the local stream on the nearest rocks.

Have FUN...the rest of us will press on.

ETA! Oops! That means too that YOU will cease wearing clothing that the rest of us enjoy...my BAD.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




What's doubly funny is that without the very petroleum based products which they claim to abhor they have NO chance of creating a green fuel.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 16, 2010)

The T said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Way ahead of you Mr T....

If I couldn't live my life naked, I wouldn't live in The Sunshine State.​
(Insert your preferred Deity here) BLESS American Freedoms like nudity on private property!


----------



## Meister (Jun 16, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Wow!  That gives a whole new meaning to an AVE-JOE.


----------



## The T (Jun 17, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


----------



## The T (Jun 17, 2010)

ConHog said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


 
They fail to understand the ramifications of what they want. And it shows in the people they keep sending to the District Of Criminals, and I'll bet their State and Locals are criminals as well. Just look how many have already taken their States and towns down the primrose path...and now have their hands out to bail them out.

These people are Dangerous.


----------



## antagon (Jun 17, 2010)

Jeremy said:


> The true reason BHO implimented the moritorium is the fact he is an Enviro-Statist. Plain and simple.
> 
> Levin says it best...
> 
> "If nature has "intrinsic value" than nature exists for its own sake. Consequently, man is not to be preferred over any aspect of his natural surroundings. He is no better than any other organism and much worse than most because of his destructive existence. And so it is that the Enviro-Statist abandons reason for a faith that preaches human regression and self-loathing. And he does so by claiming the moral high ground-saving man from himself and nature from man. Most individuals who are sympathetic to environmental causes are unwitiing marks, responsive to the Enviro-Statist's  manipulation of science, imagery, and language. Over time they self-surrender liberty for authority, abundance for scarcity, and optimism for pessimism. "Save the planet!" is the rallying cry that justifies nearly any intrusion by government into the life of the individual. The individual, after all, is expendable."



maybe you're an idiot.  maybe we've learned that the idea of wells deeper than divers can access laid by companies as recklessly as BP has needs to take a breather.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 17, 2010)

antagon said:


> Jeremy said:
> 
> 
> > The true reason BHO implimented the moritorium is the fact he is an Enviro-Statist. Plain and simple.
> ...



You do realize that it is fact the government who told BP to drill so deep?


----------



## sangha (Jun 17, 2010)

ConHog said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Jeremy said:
> ...



You obviously don't realize that some people do not share your delusions


----------



## antagon (Jun 17, 2010)

ConHog said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Jeremy said:
> ...



maybe we've learned, hog.  _learned_.

'told them to drill'


----------



## ConHog (Jun 17, 2010)

sangha said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> > antagon said:
> ...



It's a fact, three times BP applied for a waiver to drill 500' from shore, three times LA approved it, and 3 times the federal government denied and told them to move further off shore. 

Now, here's the irony of your stupidity. You could legitimately blame the BOOSH Administration for this decision, but no you want to hit BP for everything so you just pretend it didn't happen.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 18, 2010)

ConHog said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > ConHog said:
> ...


You gave up finding a link for this nonsense I see. 

Big surprise.


----------



## beowolfe (Jun 18, 2010)

Diesel fuel - Will no longer need.
Motor Oil - We have synthetics
Bearing Grease - We have synthetics

Ink - Can be made from tree products
Floor Wax - Create floors that don't need to be waxed
Ballpoint Pens - See Ink.  If the point is brass and the casing can be made of practically anything.
Football Cleats - Can be made from leather.

Upholstery - Can be made from leather.
Sweaters - Wool
Boats - Wood or steel
Insecticides - Any number of chemicals

Bicycle Tires - Rubber Trees
Sports Car Bodies - Graphite
Nail Polish - Can be made from almost anything.  
Fishing lures - Can be made from other things.  Fishing line made from oil is only 1 of 5 types of fishing lines.

Dresses - Can be made from cotton, silk or any number of other materials
Tires - Rubber trees
Golf Bags - Leather or other materials
Perfumes - Any number of other materials

Cassettes - CD's, DVD,s, and other storage mediums have already placed cassettes on the 'endangered products' list.
Dishwasher parts - Can be made of other materials.  Originally made of metal.
Tool Boxes - Metal
Shoe Polish - Can be made of many other materials

Motorcycle Helmet - Don't need them
Caulking - is already being made from non-oil products
Petroleum Jelly - Don't need.
Transparent Tape - Don't need

CD Player - Can be made from other materials.  Most important parts aren't made from oil products anyway
Faucet Washers - Neoprene Washers (which can be made from limestone)
Antiseptics - Don't have to be made from oil
Clothesline - aluminium

Curtains - cotton or other natural fibers
Food Preservatives - Not a good idea to eat foods preserved with oil products (that's why we have so many diseases)
Basketballs - leather (they're better anyway)
Soap - can be made from any number of materials. 

Vitamin Capsules - use pills
Antihistamines - Salt is a natural antihistamine
Purses - leather
Shoes - leather

Dashboards - leather or fabric
Cortisone - can be made from fish oil
Deodorant - can be made from the oil of trees
Footballs - leather

Putty - Can be made from linseed oil
Dyes - Can be made from practically anything
Panty Hose - Can be made from synthetics
Refrigerant - We already have non-oil based refrigerants

Percolators - There's always instant coffee
Life Jackets - Can be made from cork
Rubbing Alcohol - Can be made from other products
Linings - can be made from practically anything.

There are two things to remember here.  

1. With the exception of gasoline, the vast majority of products made from oil can and are being made from non-petroleum sources.

2. We don't need to eliminate oil based products entirely; we simply need to replace them as fuel for vehicles and fuel for power generation.  Then we should have enough oil on US soil (and not in the ocean) to facilitate producing the rest, if you want to keep using oil for some thing.  But it can be totally replaced in our economy by things that are:

1. Easier to get.
2. Replenishible
3. Not the threat to the environment if something goes wrong.


----------



## ConHog (Jun 18, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Diesel fuel - Will no longer need.
> Motor Oil - We have synthetics
> Bearing Grease - We have synthetics
> 
> ...





Looking at your list of replacement items, I have to say PETA would be all over your ass.

Not to mention some are just unrealistic. For example, what non petroleum based medium has replaced the cassette?


----------



## antagon (Jun 18, 2010)

solid-state, buddy.  welcome to the 21st century.

the original implication that anyone advocates total elimination of petroleum-based products was dirt stupid to start with, where does that put splitting hairs to defend it?


----------



## Meister (Jun 18, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Diesel fuel - Will no longer need.
> Motor Oil - We have synthetics
> Bearing Grease - We have synthetics
> 
> ...



I'm patiently waiting for your dollar cost analysis.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jun 18, 2010)

Meister said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > Diesel fuel - Will no longer need.
> ...



Good short term thinking lad, just what tomorrows children need.


----------



## Meister (Jun 18, 2010)

AVG-JOE said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



Call it what you want, Joe.  But items are going to become very expensive, and I don't see a lot of money in the hands of the children with all the taxes that will be added in our generation to clean up the mess we're in.  just sayin....


----------



## Charles_Main (Jun 18, 2010)

How about waving the Jones act 2 months ago and accepting the help offered from other nations. Oh wait I forgot Obama can only ignore the laws he wants to. He has to follow the Jones act.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jun 18, 2010)

Meister said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



If you seriously think the costs of this spill will amount to anything when compared to all the other massive debts this government has heaped on us. You need to learn some basic math.


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

Charles_Main said:


> How about waving the Jones act 2 months ago and accepting the help offered from other nations. Oh wait I forgot Obama can only ignore the laws he wants to. He has to follow the Jones act.



uh-oh.  sheep off pasture! 

another hack thirsty to deride the US by any stretch of the truth.


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  has spent the past week and half fighting to get working barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. By Thursday morning, against the governor's wishes, those barges still were sitting idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.
Louisiana Governor Jindal frustrated over decision-making red tape.

"It's the most frustrating thing," the Republican governor told ABC News while visiting Buras, La. "Literally, [Wednesday] morning we found out that they were halting all of these barges."

Watch "World News" for David Muir's report from Louisiana tonight.

Sixteen barges sat stationary Thursday, although they had been sucking up thousands of gallons of BP's oil as recently as Tuesday. Workers in hazmat suits and gas masks pumped the oil out of the Louisiana waters and into steel tanks. It was a homegrown idea that seemed to be effective at collecting the thick gunk. 

BP Oil Spill: Against Gov. Bobby Jindal's Wishes, Crude-Sucking Barges Stopped by Coast Guard - ABC News


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

from the same:



> After Jindal strenuously made his case, the barges finally got the go-ahead Thursday to return to the Gulf and get back to work, after more than 24 hours of sitting idle.


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> from the same:
> 
> 
> 
> > After Jindal strenuously made his case, the barges finally got the go-ahead Thursday to return to the Gulf and get back to work, after more than 24 hours of sitting idle.



And your point is????


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

Intense said:


> Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  has spent the past week and half fighting to get working barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. By Thursday morning, against the governor's wishes, those barges still were sitting idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.
> Louisiana Governor Jindal frustrated over decision-making red tape.
> 
> "It's the most frustrating thing," the Republican governor told ABC News while visiting Buras, La. "Literally, [Wednesday] morning we found out that they were halting all of these barges."
> ...



and your point is?


----------



## sangha (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  has spent the past week and half fighting to get working barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. By Thursday morning, against the governor's wishes, those barges still were sitting idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.
> ...



The point is that Jindals laziness and incompetence resulted in a weak request and so he had to go back and "strenously" argue his request.


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

sangha said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...



.....hack


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  has spent the past week and half fighting to get working barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. By Thursday morning, against the governor's wishes, those barges still were sitting idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.
> ...



They were halted because they couldn't find the safety vests.


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

and your point is, meister?


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

My point is that there were other means than having all the barges shut down for a period of time during this disaster, Antagon.


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

lots of folks believe that this deal needs to be a disorganized panic.  instead, i think that with everyone compliant with regulations like safety vests and fire extinguishers on boats skimming oil, even if it takes over 24 hours exclusion from the thousands of other boats involved, that the job will be done right and safely.

that's the way shit's done in the US, man.  a foreign operation without a grip on these principles set this whole mess off in the first place.

reactionaries take incidents like these and try to inflate them into a criticism of america, to which i say, 'what's your point?'


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal  has spent the past week and half fighting to get working barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. By Thursday morning, against the governor's wishes, those barges still were sitting idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.
> ...



My point is too over your head. Glad bureaucracy never stands in your way. Those inspections could just as easily been done with those skimmers on line Einstein. Too bad your theories are not applied to border security. 

How about the Census count that perverts Congressional Representation in the House????? 

The only raving panicked Loonies I've seen vote left wing, is that who you are referring to?????


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> lots of folks believe that this deal needs to be a disorganized panic.  instead, i think that with everyone compliant with regulations like safety vests and fire extinguishers on boats skimming oil, even if it takes over 24 hours exclusion from the thousands of other boats involved, that the job will be done right and safely.
> 
> that's the way shit's done in the US, man.  a foreign operation without a grip on these principles set this whole mess off in the first place.
> 
> reactionaries take incidents like these and try to inflate them into a criticism of america, to which i say, 'what's your point?'



You are right about disorganized panic, in that the Administration leaves the Coast Guard rudderless. Good point. Thank You for that.


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

so you've got a talent for making a big deal out of selectively quoted bullshit, making happy faces and non-sequitur commentary.  great, Intense.


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> lots of folks believe that this deal needs to be a disorganized panic.  instead, i think that with everyone compliant with regulations like safety vests and fire extinguishers on boats skimming oil, even if it takes over 24 hours exclusion from the thousands of other boats involved, that the job will be done right and safely.
> 
> that's the way shit's done in the US, man.  a foreign operation without a grip on these principles set this whole mess off in the first place.
> 
> reactionaries take incidents like these and try to inflate them into a criticism of america, to which i say, 'what's your point?'



Yeah, too bad they didn't think of that before they left port.  So much for the mandatory safety checks, huh?  
I do believe the criticism is how disorganized and poor reaction time this was....just like under the Bush administration.  But barry is teflon and gets another pass, and another chance to blame the prior administration.  
Like I said, there were alternative ways to get what they needed and still not miss a beat....this is America.


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

antagon said:


> so you've got a talent for making a big deal out of selectively quoted bullshit, making happy faces and non-sequitur commentary.  great, Intense.



I'm not the one defending incompetence. Carry on though, it is amusing.


----------



## sangha (Jun 19, 2010)

Meister said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...



Jindle is such an incompetent boob, he couldn't find safety vests and fire extinguishers.

Here's what Jindle is good at


----------



## Intense (Jun 19, 2010)

sangha said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > antagon said:
> ...



He is the best thing that has happened to that State in Decades.


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

Sangha, you are pretty ignorant aren't you?  The Coast Guard is an extention of the federal government. 
Better stay in school, sonny.


----------



## Meister (Jun 19, 2010)

Intense said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Sangha is obviously too young to know that.....he is just playing the tool of the left wing whacko's.  I don't think the democrats would even claim sangha as one of their own.


----------



## antagon (Jun 19, 2010)

there are plenty of ways to look at this.  my way is to see it as a way to scrutinize shit for the sake of doing so.  the media does this for money and for filler.  i think americans doing this lack a basic sense of pride. 

by no means do i preclude those who jumped to take shot at bush over a natural disaster.  instead, i draw a line between folks who are deeply critical of the smallest details of the biggest operations and folks who have not been close to anything like that, whatsoever.  

i'm more proud that the US could field a 5,000 boat fleet of which many are private citizens, and hold industry accountable for their disasters than i am likely to give a shit about how a handful of boats lost a day for skimming oil with no fire extinguishers.

some nations cant pull this off; most nations can pull this off, and companies destroy their ecology without consequence.


----------



## Jeremy (Jun 19, 2010)

Sangha, Jindle has more leadership ability in his left nut than this miserable failure you jack off to.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jun 19, 2010)

Meister said:


> Sangha, you are pretty ignorant aren't you?  The Coast Guard is an extention of the federal government.
> Better stay in school, sonny.



Wait did that wack job just imply it was Jindle's job to make sure there were life vests in the barges?

Are these people for real?

What I want to know is why is no one talking about how after Jindle Got the things pumping and then the Coast guard shut them down for 2 days. When they started back up the Obama administration announced it to the press as if it was one of the things THEY were doing about the spill.

"look im acting I got these barges pumping oil out, Never mind they have been there for 8 days and then the US coast guard shut them down and let thousands of gallons of oil get ashore, I am going to claim it was my idea, Look at me Im leading. Hope and change America hope and change weeeeee"

Its unreal how low Obama will stoop. Real scum in action. He like a god damn school kid.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 21, 2010)

Meister said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...


If that were the truth, why didn't jindal just give them vests instead of spending 24 hours crying for someone else to do it?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 21, 2010)

Charles_Main said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Sangha, you are pretty ignorant aren't you?  The Coast Guard is an extention of the federal government.
> ...


If he's sending them out under the auspices of the State, yes it is.


----------



## antagon (Jun 21, 2010)

dozens and dozens of posts have been made by partisan hacks who have taken up arguments that non-sequitur maritime law, the jones act, is an inhibition to the clearly international effort to clean up the gulf and mitigate the flow of oil from the broken well.  failing the cogency of that bullshit, dozens more posts have focused on the < 0.2% of the fleet being curtailed for < 5% of the duration of the operation, and because they were sucking up a flammable substance without fire extinguishers; they were operating on the open ocean without enough life vests for their staff.

what is next for these partisan scumbags riding on any minor glint of negativity?  these shitstains of americans continue to go out of their way to find inane ways 'america has failed' or 'obama has failed'.  they've failed in that if these piece of shit arguments represent all that is wrong with the effort to mitigate the damage of this deal, we don't have much to worry about, at all.


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

19 Jun 2010 20:16:24 GMT
Source: Reuters
* Local officials frustrated by delays, red tape

* Barges halted for 24 hours for safety inspections

* Military-type chain of command urged

By Jeffrey Jones

GRAND ISLE, Louisiana, June 19 (Reuters) - Those on the front lines of the U.S. Gulf Coast oil spill say they are forced to fight two battles -- one against the crude washing into lush wetlands and another against needless bureaucracy.

Sixty-one days after the BP Plc <BP.L> well began spewing crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, angry local officials blame dozens of federal agencies involved in approving response plans, a maze of regulations and poor coordination for their struggles beating back the slick.

"My experience has been frustration, too much red tape, no a sense of urgency. For the state and the coastal parishes that are directly affected to put forth a plan, you have to kick and scream every step of the way to get it approved," said John Young, council chairman for Jefferson Parish in Louisiana.

"The president said it's a war. I agree we're under siege, but if it was a war, we'd be occupied territory now."

It is time for President Barack Obama's administration to appoint an "oil spill czar" to streamline operations for the 31,000 people fighting the worst spill in U.S. history and avoid the costly delays, Young said as he prepared to board a boat to tour his region's fouled wetlands.

As a guide, many point to the arrival of U.S. Army General Russel Honore in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The tough-talking military man was credited with taking control and kick-starting the city's stalled rescue mission in the weeks after the storm.

Last week, the U.S. Coast Guard shut down 16 vacuum barges that were sucking up crude from Louisiana marshes. The units, which consist of trucks and tanks on barges that suck up thousands of gallons of crude, needed to be checked for stability and if they had life jackets and fire extinguishers.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal had asked officials to inspect them quickly without bringing them back to dock. But the units sat idle for 24 hours before being allowed to travel back to oil-fouled Barataria Bay, Bay Jimmy and Pass A Loutre.

After 24 hours, the barges went back to work, and according to media reports, no inspections were performed.

On Friday, the Coast Guard shut down two more barges, prompting Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser to make an angry call the the White House, which ordered them back into operation, his office said.

Meanwhile, the oil keeps gushing into the Gulf at a rate now estimated as high as 60,000 barrels a day.

"NO STREAMLINED SYSTEM"

Jindal has blasted a lack of coordination between federal departments overseeing the fight and state and local officials waging it.

"It is frustrating because it doesn't seem like the left hand knows what the right hand is doing," he said recently. "There is no streamlined system here. This is why we keep stressing that we need to see more of a sense of urgency from the Coast Guard, federal officials and BP."

For its part, the Coast Guard said it supported the barge project, but had to ensure their safety.

The incidents followed a weeks-long effort by state and local officials to have a plan approved to construct sand berms to protect barrier islands from encroaching oil, an effort that is expected to cost $360 million.

Young said he supported a military-style chain of command where someone at the top has the power the make quick decisions putting response plans into action and making sure that crews have the equipment they need.

"Absolutely -- one person. Maybe they need an escrow account for that. Get one military person who knows the chain of command to get things done, because this is a war-type situation," Young said. "We can't be deciding and executing by committee because it's just not getting done." 

Reuters AlertNet - Bureaucracy frustrates U.S. Gulf oil spill efforts


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 21, 2010)

First, I happen to agree with you that Lt. Gen. Honere would be the ideal person to put in charge of this catastrophe. In charge with the authority to draw on whatever resources there are available, government or private.

Second, if they did not have adaquete equipment aboard those barges, then the Coast Guard was correct in telling them to get the equipment, or get off the water. We already have eleven dead in this mess.

Third, if the Coast Guard acted in the normal manner, then that was wrong. This is an emergency situation, and correcting the defiencies in safety equipment on those barges should have been expidited by all concerned.

Fourth, something that would have the governors screaming, the authority given to someone like Honere should exceed that of any given governor. This is a national disaster, affecting all states, as it affects a major food supply of this nation.


----------



## Ericredscousin (Jun 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama did zero
> 
> He should have mobilized the army Corp of engineers to assist, instead he went on another vacation - again.



And the Army Corps of Engineers has what experience exactly in deep water oil drilling?
BP, and Exxon etc. are the experts in this. NOT the Army, or the Government.

Under Bush and Chaney Big Oil was left to their own devices, and this is what happens.   You people didn't want any oversite or regulations on business by our government. But then when really bad things happen, you complain and say "where was the govenment, why don't they do something?"    Really sad.


----------



## Ericredscousin (Jun 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Obama should have doe whatever he could to plug the fucking leak.
> 
> Instead he did nothing.



OK Mike, you are good at cursing, but why not offer an idea on how to plug that f***ing leak?
See, Obama has about as much experience with deep water oil drilling as you or I do.
He does not have an answere because he, like the rest of us, is not an oil expert.
In fact, there are no people in the government that is an expert at deep water oil drilling.  If they did, they would be making millions working FOR BP, not working in the Gov.

So think it over, and come back when you have an idea of how to plug the lead, instead of must saying Obama should plug it, like it is some easy thing to do.


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

Ericredscousin said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Obama did zero
> ...



Pretty one dimensional thinking there sparky. Bush did it!  Time to wake up there and take responsibility.


----------



## Ericredscousin (Jun 21, 2010)

theHawk said:


> sangha said:
> 
> 
> > Some are criticizing Obama for not doing enough in response to the oil leak that BP created. (Of course, some of those same people are criticizing Obama for doing too much).
> ...





Wasn't it the lack of bureaucracy that led to this accident?
BP was left alone to cut whatever corners they wanted and this is the result.
And if they did lift all restrictions on the cleanup, and then that made matters worse, they you would be back here saying how they failed.


----------



## Ericredscousin (Jun 21, 2010)

[
You do realize that money is finite right?[/QUOTE]


And so is oil..........


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

Ericredscousin said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> > sangha said:
> ...



Lack of Bureaucracy?????      We can only hope and pray for the day. 

The government had multiple responsibilities that it brushed off and rubber stamped. The bureaucracy is doing just fine.


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

Ericredscousin said:


> [
> You do realize that money is finite right?




And so is oil..........[/QUOTE]

Money gets watered down, oil is produced. Money gas a given value at a specific point in time. Oil has a specific reserve at a specific point in time.


----------



## Ericredscousin (Jun 21, 2010)

Intense said:


> Ericredscousin said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...




Never said Bush did it.  But under he and Chaney, the oil industry was defacto unregulated and was able to leave critical safety devices off these rigs.  Big Oil "knew" best on how to operate and they were left alone to do what they wanted.
They were working at the absolute edge of current technology and know one care because there is this central belief on the Right that big business needs to be left alone as they are the "experts," and that government regulation is wrong.
Now we have this happen and all anyone says is where was the govenment? 
The same as what heppend with Madoff.


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

Ericredscousin said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Ericredscousin said:
> ...



Rubber stamping and failing to do inspections is as much a problem now as then. Stop diverting blame, it is juvenile.


----------



## Intense (Jun 21, 2010)

Ericredscousin said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > Ericredscousin said:
> ...



You pervert the concept of government acting within it's power's competently with Government assuming authority outside of it's power's. Digest that a while, would you???


----------



## Liability (Sep 1, 2010)

Ravi said:


> antagon said:
> 
> 
> > furthermore, many foreign vessels are working on this situation, already.  the deepwater horizon is a foreign vessel.  the jones act has to do with the origin and crew of boats shipping goods from one american port to another.  that has little or nothing to do with the spill.
> ...



Huh.

I hadn't seen Raving Stupidity's post before it got quoted by tha malcontent.

There is, in reality (an alien concept to that nasty rancid twat Raving Imbecile), I would have no reason to wish to see any part of the United States (or any other part of the world, for that matter) "destroyed.  And if some part of the U.S. were to be "destroyed," that wouldn't assist me or anybody in "spreading lies," anyway.  Raving Retard is quite illogical.

And to answer the question posed so adroitly by tha malcontent, it is quite clear that Raving Lunacy has NO ability to demonstrate that I have lied.  I haven't.  

I have (rarely, but it does happen) been mistaken a few times.   But, no.  I don't lie.  And in making that claim, it is (ironic eh?) Raving Fuckwit who has been shown to be a liar.


----------

