mimartin Posted May 18, 2010 Share Posted May 18, 2010 As I eat Gulf Flounder for dinner. I still say nay to nukes. Hum…the oil makes it easier to fry; maybe nukes will mean flounder will be precooked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted May 18, 2010 Share Posted May 18, 2010 how can you call yourself a texan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Well, it's been nearly 100 days, now, and oil is still pouring into the Gulf. It's as if the Obama administration is deliberately dragging its feet, thereby ensuring as big of an environmental disaster as possible, for political purposes, such as a permanent moratorium on offshore drilling or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Kind of damn he if he does, damn if he doesn't. He takes the lead from BP, he is a socialist or in BP’s back pocket (depending on who you are). He calls them out on TV, then he is a potty mouth. He tells BP to set up a trust fund, then he is just another lawyer against tort reform. Such is life as the President of the United States. 50% of the people will be pissed no matter what you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Well, according to the polls, >50% of the people are unhappy with a lot of things he's doing, not the least of which is mismanaging the cleanup of the Gulf and protection of America's coastline. This is likely to cost the dems big come November (barring the reps et al snatching defeat from the jaws of victory). Given that it took him >70 days to suspend the Jones Act and that he's pushing the "green energy" agenda, I think it's safe to say his lack of response is either gross incompetence and/or gross criminal negligence to satisfy his labor and eco-freak base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Kind of damn he if he does, damn if he doesn't. He takes the lead from BP, he is a socialist or in BP’s back pocket (depending on who you are). He calls them out on TV, then he is a potty mouth. He tells BP to set up a trust fund, then he is just another lawyer against tort reform. Such is life as the President of the United States. 50% of the people will be pissed no matter what you do. Yeah, but at the moment, shouldn't capping the leak take precedence over all of the legal BS? Can't all of the pathetic finger-pointing wait until the leak is stopped? Is the president ever going to get off his ass and do something about the leak itself? This is starting to make Bush's handling of Katrina look rather tame by comparison. I mean 100 days?! Ridiculous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 Given, Bush couldn't do too much about Katrina, and Obama can't really do that much about the oil spill, simply because the president can't do much except approve measures. So, the only way the president can personally do something is to get more power. Oh, wait...but then everyone will complain that the president is becoming a dictator. So it's a lose-lose situation, unless Congress does something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 Obama can't really do that much about the oil spillHe could, but he is just too selfish to give up his secret identity. Show spoiler (hidden content - requires Javascript to show) It isn't like they haven't been trying to plug the leak. It is just everything they tried has failed. The time for planning for these contingencies is not after they have happened, but before. If the oil companies do not have the ability to stop blow outs, then perhaps they should not be drilling there until they get a working plan. Oil is important, but so are the other jobs and food supply provided by the Gulf of Mexico. Given that it took him >70 days to suspend the Jones Act and that he's pushing the "green energy" agenda, I think it's safe to say his lack of response is either gross incompetence and/or gross criminal negligence to satisfy his labor and eco-freak base. So is BP purposely helping President Obama with his green energy agenda by not plugging up the damn hole? Now that is a conspiracy theory (Where are Mel Gibson and Julie Roberts when you need them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 @Ping--ok, so you're willing to throw a democrat controlled Congress under the bus to attempt to preserve BO's reputation. @mimartin--it's simplistic for either side to point a finger and say "It's his fault and not mine." I agree with you that BP is at fault* for lack of safety precautions, but that doesn't exonerate BO from his failure to protect the coastline and Gulf in general. Nor does it take away from the fact that the govt has put shallow drilling, which is considered much safer, largely off limits nor their signing off on BP's platform as ready for business w/o doing it's own due diligence. Trust, as Reagan said......but verify. This disaster and its aftermath are as much the govt's fault as they are BP's. *it doesn't help BP that they have a storied history of safety violations that preceded, but are unrelated to, this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 @Toten: First off, I was just pointing out what I viewed to be the only way for the pres to do something about the oil spill. And secondly, I really don't know if I approve of Obama. I don't disapprove of him, but I wouldn't say I approve of him, either. And I don't think I said to throw Congress under the bus. I was simply pointing out what I believed would be a complaint from the opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted July 6, 2010 Share Posted July 6, 2010 @Toten: First off, I was just pointing out what I viewed to be the only way for the pres to do something about the oil spill. And secondly, I really don't know if I approve of Obama. I don't disapprove of him, but I wouldn't say I approve of him, either. And I don't think I said to throw Congress under the bus. I was simply pointing out what I believed would be a complaint from the opposition. @Ping: where many people, on both sides of the aisle, take issue w/BO is on his lackluster and irresponsible response to cleaning up the mess. He wouldn't have needed Congresses approval to suspend the Jones Act and allow foreign help to come into play while Americans tried to scrounge together as many domestic resources as possible to do so also. The reason I said "throw under the bus" was b/c you were punting BO's responsibility to take action to Congress. Rather than try to multi-task, BO has concentrated primarily on litigation/liability than trying to address the unfolding ecological disaster in the gulf at the same time. So, the only way the president can personally do something is to get more power. Oh, wait...but then everyone will complain that the president is becoming a dictator. So it's a lose-lose situation, unless Congress does something. So is BP purposely helping President Obama with his green energy agenda by not plugging up the damn hole? Now that is a conspiracy theory (Where are Mel Gibson and Julie Roberts when you need them). Not quite sure how you make that leap. My guess is that BP would've plugged the leak 3 months ago if they'd been able to. The disaster has taken a real toll on their reputation and stock price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.