Thread: Obama's bumbling of the oil spill

Originally Posted by Imperator

who knows? was a crony in charge of the response? Who called off the burn? Why did the first burn not take place until 8 days afterward? There was an sop calling for such....goober posited the remark that brown was a political pick and had connections etc. well?It appears good enough...no? Obama took a bunch of money from BP, why did he take their word for so long?

I believe that the weather called off the burn. Not worth killing pilots over, is it?

Just so that we're perfectly clear - are you taking the position that the government should have stepped in immediately? Would BP still be responsible for the costs of the cleanup? What if they objected? How long is an appropriate time to take the word of the company? Do you have any evidence or indication that if they hadn't been a campaign donor that President Obama's actions would have been any different?

Originally Posted by Imperator

who knows? was a crony in charge of the response? Who called off the burn? Why did the first burn not take place until 8 days afterward? There was an sop calling for such....goober posited the remark that brown was a political pick and had connections etc. well?It appears good enough...no? Obama took a bunch of money from BP, why did he take their word for so long?

Have you bothered to get the facts concerning the burning of crude oil on water before you made up your mind as to what should or should not be done?

There is a lot more to it than burning a few leaves in your backyard in the Fall. The consequences of a burn are not trivial.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

:rolleyes:

Of course, the problem with Katrina was that Bush appointed Brownie, and Brownie was a complete fucktard

err

Palin-American.

As a result, he fucked around with FEMA, and FEMA bungled the response. That is why Bush took heat.

Now, is there any evidence that Obama did something similar?

uhm fema is a federal org....the state didn't ask for or that is waited until it made femas job that much harder, when they got going they didn't have their act together, but laying it all on bush was well, it is what it is.

where was the epa? why did they wait to burn, why did they wait until 8 days after the spillage started? I think those are reasonable questions. There may be reasonable answers, I can ask, right?

what does palin have to do with this?

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

Have you bothered to get the facts concerning the burning of crude oil on water before you made up your mind as to what should or should not be done?

There is a lot more to it than burning a few leaves in your backyard in the Fall. The consequences of a burn are not trivial.

I have made up zero, there was a plan in place created in 94, for such contingency, I believe the no.1 go to ,was burning the oil, .....they waited 8 days to do that..THEN the water was by that time too choppy...just wondering...that okay with you?

Originally Posted by pramjockey

I believe that the weather called off the burn. Not worth killing pilots over, is it?

Just so that we're perfectly clear - are you taking the position that the government should have stepped in immediately? Would BP still be responsible for the costs of the cleanup? What if they objected? How long is an appropriate time to take the word of the company? Do you have any evidence or indication that if they hadn't been a campaign donor that President Obama's actions would have been any different?

I am not sure, I am speculating.

as far as;
any evidence or indication that if they hadn't been a campaign donor that President Obama's actions would have been any different

wow, has the worm turned.

Originally Posted by Imperator

I am not sure, I am speculating.

as far as;
any evidence or indication that if they hadn't been a campaign donor that President Obama's actions would have been any different

wow, has the worm turned.

Are you seriously comparing GW's presidency with Obama's presidency?

Originally Posted by Imperator

who knows? was a crony in charge of the response? Who called off the burn? Why did the first burn not take place until 8 days afterward? There was an sop calling for such....goober posited the remark that brown was a political pick and had connections etc. well?It appears good enough...no? Obama took a bunch of money from BP, why did he take their word for so long?

Well, if you don't know what's happening, blame Obama, and skip your meds.

There was a fire, BP said the well was shut down properly, and the main issue was fighting the fire and then looking for the missing men.
What is the proper response to "The well is shut down, we have 11 people missing, they could be in the water".

Then there was a small leak, and they needed to bring a submersible to look at what was going on, and it took a couple of days to get the submersible functioning, so they could definitely say they had a leak.
What is the proper response to, "there may be a small leak, we have equipment on the scene and we are trying to determine what exactly is going on"?




Burning only reduces impact, because you can only burn when the wind will take the plume out to sea,the slick is almost as big as Alabama. Are you gonna burn that off?

I not going to get into the Left verses right BS and my apology to PramJockey for misreading his prior comment...... But having been lurking around many forums including this one for years, I do find it very humorous that the left after pounding Bush for crap rushes to defend this worthless fuck of a president.

No I am not finding fault in Obama for this oil disaster, same as I found no fault of Bush for the levies after Katrina. Me thinks it time people put aside the R and D crap and act as adults and think clearly.

Originally Posted by Boggernose

So where are the fire booms? As President of the United States Obama has said the buck stops with him. Since this has happened under his watch and the necessary equipment wasn't it place and still isn't being used he get the blame.

If you want to discuss please be up to speed on what is going on. Here is the video of the administration saying it:

POLITICO.com: VIDEOS

So if they were there from DAY1 why hasn't a fire boom made it there yet?

I think more than anythiing this absolutely shows how incompetent our Federal Government really is. Here we had something in place in 1994--under Bill Clinton--and NO ONE actually thought--well gee--you know we have 4000 rigs in the Gulf of Mexico--maybe that's where this equipment belongs and not Chicago?

I see where you are going with this because Bush was BLASTED by the left in this country over Hurricane Katrina--and those who were ordered to leave--didn't and then demanded that the Federal Government show up with a PPJ sandwich and something to drink the very next day.

But, even though they did that to Bush--I am not going to blame this directly on Obama. I blame the incompetence of the Federal Government over this.

Originally Posted by Oreo

I blame the incompetence of the Federal Government over this.

Give this man or woman a beer.

Originally Posted by headbanger

... same as I found no fault of Bush for the levies after Katrina. ...

Who blamed GW for the levees?

Didn't most folks blame GW for his team's (that'd be Turd Blossom's) decision to respond based upon political considerations and an attempt to use the disaster as a election year tactic? People were dying and Turd Blossom wais trying to figure out how to turn the event into votes for GW. Thats what the people I know blamed GW for.

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

Who blamed GW for the levees?

Didn't most folks blame GW for his team's (that'd be Turd Blossom's) decision to respond based upon political considerations and an attempt to use the disaster as a election year tactic? People were dying and Turd Blossom wais trying to figure out how to turn the event into votes for GW. Thats what the people I know blamed GW for.

May I suggest that you research this very forum then.. Bush was blamed from the levees to my dog shitting in my yard to including being involved with 9/11.....you name it, it was here. and elsewhere.

Originally Posted by headbanger

May I suggest that you research this very forum then.. Bush was blamed from the levees to my dog shitting in my yard to including being involved with 9/11.....you name it, it was here. and elsewhere.

Yes, the Truthers are out there, but they are a small group.

Now I am curious: What was the fault with the levees that was blamed on GW? Was the blame for the levees widespread? I remember GW made a big deal about the levees being topped, not breached, which always had me scratching my head as I couldn't see what difference that made to the people who were dying.