or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez - Page 7

post #241 of 700
This spill is a complete nightmare and I am getting annoyed by Obama's non chalance about it. However I also don't know what the government can do. The military is not equipped to handle situations like this nor is the national guard or any of our fire depts. A full blown gov't response would only be possible if "we, the people" would own BP then we would also own the equipment to deal with it. This is truly a case of private, non US business ffffing up public US property big time. It is very possible that this spill will actually reach England once the current picks it up. On the way there, it has the capacity to severely damage the US economy, the very thing that seems to solely depend on oil to be fruitful. This MUST CHANGE ASAP. We can not as a nation who claims to provide liberty to it's citizens, depend on private industries to provide us with a secure and constant supply of our basic energy needs. This is asking for collapse and is comparable to economic Kamikazi.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #242 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

We can not as a nation who claims to provide liberty to it's citizens, depend on private industries to provide us with a secure and constant supply of our basic energy needs. This is asking for collapse and is comparable to economic Kamikazi.

Tell me, where in our founding documents (The Declaration of Independence, Constitution, etc.) is the claim that it is the duty of government to "provide liberty" to its citizens, or that our rights come from government?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #243 of 700
The following is a post from over at Huffington Post by elfish-



"These areas had been OFF LIMITS to drilling, until Bush was elected:

1. May 2001. Cheney chaired a secret Energy Task Force, (NEPDG), releasing a document pushing offshore drilling and removing restrictions.

2. August, 2005, the Republican/Bush passed the "Energy Policy Act of 2005" authorizing drilling on the outer continental shelf..

3. December 2006, the Republican/Bush pass the "Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act" (GOMESA), mandating leasing 7.8 million acres in the Centeral Gulf, the area of the current spill.

4. April 2007. Bush cleared millions of acres in the "Central Planning Area" for drilling including this site. The EIS downplayed the risks:

"Offshore oil spills resulting from a proposed action in the
WPA are not expected to damage significantly any wetlands
along the Gulf Coast." (Page 83)

"A subsurface blowout would have a negligible effect on GOM
fish resources or commercial fishing." (Page 89)

6. July 2008, Bush lifted the ban on offshore drilling in place for 26 years. Originally passed by congress in 1982, it was expanded in 1990 by Bush's father and Clinton extended it to 2012.

Bush said:

"For years, my administration has been calling on Congress to
expand domestic oil production. Unfortunately, Democrats on
Capitol Hill have rejected virtually every proposal."

"Failure to act is unacceptable. So today, I've
issued a memorandum to lift the executive prohibition on oil
exploration in the Outter Continental Shelf."



And here are his/her links to go with it-

"Links:

http://www.wtrg.com/EnergyReport/Nat...rgy-Policy.pdf
http://www.gomr.mms.gov/PDFs/2007/2007-018-Vol1.pdf
http://www.offshore-mag.com/index/ar...of-mexico.html
http://www.mms.gov/offshore/GOMESA/PDFs/GOMESA.pdf
http://www.mms.gov/ooc/PDFs/FactShee...earProgram.pdf
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po..._drilling.html "
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0....html#comments
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #244 of 700
You'd be utterly lost without HuffPo.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #245 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

This spill is a complete nightmare and I am getting annoyed by Obama's non chalance about it. However I also don't know what the government can do.

Wait! Wait! Wait!

When Katrina hit the gulf states liberals swore at Bush for doing nothing about the crisis. Now this oil catastrophe has been ongoing for a whole friggin month and Obama has done nothing but campaign for Democrats! Where the hell is the Democrat outrage? Obama's only been down to the gulf once. WTF?
post #246 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Wait! Wait! Wait!

When Katrina hit the gulf states liberals swore at Bush for doing nothing about the crisis. Now this oil catastrophe has been ongoing for a whole friggin month and Obama has done nothing but campaign for Democrats! Where the hell is the Democrat outrage? Obama's only been down to the gulf once. WTF?

One more time for people who have been lobotomized:
Katrina: weather event, predicted for weeks in advance. Rescue effort directed at PEOPLE was badly organized.

Oil spill: Caused by: it looks like bad concrete work by Halliburton. 11 people died in explosion (Obama failed to see the gas plume raising from 1 mile blow the ocean in a few seconds, get on A1 and pull the 11 guys off the platform, he should resign immediately). Oil well is privately owned. Gov't does not have capacity to plug well 1 mile below surface, all gov't should resign immediately.


Or are you advocating the gov.t should spend a few billion to purchase the equipment needed to deal with future problems like this. If yes you would call yourself a socialist who wants to tell private business what to do and how it's done. We currently do not know what equipment would be needed otherwise the spill would already be stopped.
You think Obama is able to somehow stop the spill by standing on the beach with oil to his ankles? Yeah his time would be well spent like this. BTW How much time did Bush spend in New Orleans?
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #247 of 700
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
That post definately reflects the thinking of someone who has been lobotomized.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #248 of 700
Q. Who are the eco terrorists?

A. BP.

Q. And who are BP?

A. "B"ush "P"alin.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #249 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The following is a post from over at Huffington Post by elfish-



"These areas had been OFF LIMITS to drilling, until Bush was elected:

1. May 2001. Cheney chaired a secret Energy Task Force, (NEPDG), releasing a document pushing offshore drilling and removing restrictions.

2. August, 2005, the Republican/Bush passed the "Energy Policy Act of 2005" authorizing drilling on the outer continental shelf..

3. December 2006, the Republican/Bush pass the "Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act" (GOMESA), mandating leasing 7.8 million acres in the Centeral Gulf, the area of the current spill.

4. April 2007. Bush cleared millions of acres in the "Central Planning Area" for drilling including this site. The EIS downplayed the risks:

"Offshore oil spills resulting from a proposed action in the
WPA are not expected to damage significantly any wetlands
along the Gulf Coast." (Page 83)

"A subsurface blowout would have a negligible effect on GOM
fish resources or commercial fishing." (Page 89)

6. July 2008, Bush lifted the ban on offshore drilling in place for 26 years. Originally passed by congress in 1982, it was expanded in 1990 by Bush's father and Clinton extended it to 2012.

Bush said:

"For years, my administration has been calling on Congress to
expand domestic oil production. Unfortunately, Democrats on
Capitol Hill have rejected virtually every proposal."

"Failure to act is unacceptable. So today, I've
issued a memorandum to lift the executive prohibition on oil
exploration in the Outter Continental Shelf."



And here are his/her links to go with it-

"Links:

http://www.wtrg.com/EnergyReport/Nat...rgy-Policy.pdf
http://www.gomr.mms.gov/PDFs/2007/2007-018-Vol1.pdf
http://www.offshore-mag.com/index/ar...of-mexico.html
http://www.mms.gov/offshore/GOMESA/PDFs/GOMESA.pdf
http://www.mms.gov/ooc/PDFs/FactShee...earProgram.pdf
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po..._drilling.html "
~ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0....html#comments

The biggest lie within this post is claiming Bush alone lifted the oil ban. All Bush could do is call on Congress to lift the oil ban which they did. Why was it passed by Congress in 1982 but not removed by Congress in 2008? Why was it not Reagan who put the ban in place but it is Bush who removed it?

Oh wait... that would require giving the whole picture and blaming Democrats instead of just letting them demagogue the issue. Heaven knows their total lack of concern for the entire last month, their willingness to claim $3-4 oil is the problem of greedy oil men while desiring to actually turn it into $10-12 a gallon oil thanks to greedy government with good intentions comply ignores the point.

Here is the reality, ramp up nuclear and allow more domestic drilling and more domestic resources. The companies involved in oil now are being told by governments that they are both greedy and going to be made extinct by legislative fiat whenever they get the right number of votes and the crisis to lie to the public about them. So who in that situation would ever invest ever more dollars in more equipment for more drilling and to address more problems across those increasing array of drilling sights when the government can shut you down at any time.

This accident isn't the result of drilling. It is the result of NOT being allowed to drill in an area for 25 years. When the government can arbitrarily decide what you can and cannot do on a whim for 25-50 years, no one is going to invest the resources continually to improve such abilities. Have the government ban any other action for 25 years, and see if there aren't some problems getting started again. As usual, the government is the problem and not the solution.

Finally I love how the government doesn't have the expertise or ability to address this spill but they do have the ability to determine what should be available in vending machines, whether I should be forced to compost and what my health plan should have in it and cost. What a load of bullshit!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #250 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The biggest lie within this post is claiming Bush alone lifted the oil ban. All Bush could do is call on Congress to lift the oil ban which they did. Why was it passed by Congress in 1982 but not removed by Congress in 2008? Why was it not Reagan who put the ban in place but it is Bush who removed it?

Oh wait... that would require giving the whole picture and blaming Democrats instead of just letting them demagogue the issue. Heaven knows their total lack of concern for the entire last month, their willingness to claim $3-4 oil is the problem of greedy oil men while desiring to actually turn it into $10-12 a gallon oil thanks to greedy government with good intentions comply ignores the point.

Here is the reality, ramp up nuclear and allow more domestic drilling and more domestic resources. The companies involved in oil now are being told by governments that they are both greedy and going to be made extinct by legislative fiat whenever they get the right number of votes and the crisis to lie to the public about them. So who in that situation would ever invest ever more dollars in more equipment for more drilling and to address more problems across those increasing array of drilling sights when the government can shut you down at any time.

This accident isn't the result of drilling. It is the result of NOT being allowed to drill in an area for 25 years. When the government can arbitrarily decide what you can and cannot do on a whim for 25-50 years, no one is going to invest the resources continually to improve such abilities. Have the government ban any other action for 25 years, and see if there aren't some problems getting started again. As usual, the government is the problem and not the solution.

Finally I love how the government doesn't have the expertise or ability to address this spill but they do have the ability to determine what should be available in vending machines, whether I should be forced to compost and what my health plan should have in it and cost. What a load of bullshit!

The Republicans are the real culprits because it's their baby. The Dems though have sought expanding offshore drilling too, but it was voted against by the Repubs because it didn't allow for what they considered enough drilling. That's the way it goes, nothing is off limits to Repubs when it come to oil. Even sacrificing the lives of thousands of US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of A-Rabs is par for the course.

If these companies aren't competent enough to drill because the government stopped them for so long then that gives a whole new meaning to "drill baby drill" also maybe, just maybe we shouldn't let these babies drill.

The one thing you can be sure of is there'll be a lot of new drilling going on and there'll be a lot more oil to play with at the beach.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #251 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
That post definately reflects the thinking of someone who has been lobotomized.


Yeah, the lobotomized are thinkers...???

Let me draw a few lines for ya:

_____
___________
_____
____
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #252 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Republicans are the real culprits because it's their baby. The Dems though have sought expanding offshore drilling too, but it was voted against by the Repubs because it didn't allow for what they considered enough drilling. That's the way it goes, nothing is off limits to Repubs when it come to oil. Even sacrificing the lives of thousands of US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of A-Rabs is par for the course.

Sorry, intent doesn't invalidate the actual votes. I know folks on the left really do believe that intent invalidates reality all the time but the unfortunately, that simply isn't true.

Likewise your caricatures might allow you to insulate your thinking from the facts, but reality and facts are stubborn things.

Quote:
If these companies aren't competent enough to drill because the government stopped them for so long then that gives a whole new meaning to "drill baby drill" also maybe, just maybe we shouldn't let these babies drill.

If....

The reality is that our economy and the energy needs of the United States should not be political play things subject to the whims of Senators, Presidents or Congress. They are of course treated as such now and and we have all sorts of silliness as a result. The damage is from the silliness. We build nuclear power plants and then shut them down. We fight wind and solar installations for decades for views and tortoises. We dam rivers and then remove the dams. Energy is treated as our play thing subject to whoever is in power. Even the fuel itself is reformulated in all manner of ways depending upon who is in power and what political interests are in play.

In countries that don't do this, countries that are far less capable, these accidents aren't happening. The Federal Government needs to stop treating the world as a play thing on a string.

Quote:
The one thing you can be sure of is there'll be a lot of new drilling going on and there'll be a lot more oil to play with at the beach.

Is this true in Norway, Cuba, Canada, Brazil..etc?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Yeah, the lobotomized are thinkers...???

Let me draw a few lines for ya:

_____
___________
_____
____

Perhaps you should give up on the lines and try connecting the dots for a change instead. It might help you understand better.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #253 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Sorry, intent doesn't invalidate the actual votes. I know folks on the left really do believe that intent invalidates reality all the time but the unfortunately, that simply isn't true.

Likewise your caricatures might allow you to insulate your thinking from the facts, but reality and facts are stubborn things.



If....

The reality is that our economy and the energy needs of the United States should not be political play things subject to the whims of Senators, Presidents or Congress. They are of course treated as such now and and we have all sorts of silliness as a result. The damage is from the silliness. We build nuclear power plants and then shut them down. We fight wind and solar installations for decades for views and tortoises. We dam rivers and then remove the dams. Energy is treated as our play thing subject to whoever is in power. Even the fuel itself is reformulated in all manner of ways depending upon who is in power and what political interests are in play.

In countries that don't do this, countries that are far less capable, these accidents aren't happening. The Federal Government needs to stop treating the world as a play thing on a string.



Is this true in Norway, Cuba, Canada, Brazil..etc?



Perhaps you should give up on the lines and try connecting the dots for a change instead. It might help you understand better.

The Democrats intent was to expand offshore drilling, no if's or buts there, just that the Repubs wanted to go much further, by in no small part expanding the drilling within 50 miles of the US coastline, something the dems wouldn't do. The Dems have sought votes by allowing the drilling and Obama's been prepared to abandon the moratorium in return for a better deal on climate change.

I really don't know that much about the amounts of oil pollution in the countries you listed. Certainly they have different rules and not unimportantly different legal systems (Canada's is close to Scottish law whereas the US is close to English law), based less on the Roman system which can be very restrictive. Canada, Norway and Brazil and I think, but am not sure about, Cuba too, all have to have acoustic shut off valves, though not the UK. The UK rigs are designed to be the most robust in the world due to the severe conditions in the North Sea (though how the North Sea could be harsher conditions than a hurricane in the Gulf I don't know).

Maybe the US is considered a honeypot drilling deal country? Flaunt the laws with dollars, like Italy, and you won't get caught, for a certain price.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #254 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Democrats intent was to expand offshore drilling, no if's or buts there, just that the Repubs wanted to go much further, by in no small part expanding the drilling within 50 miles of the US coastline, something the dems wouldn't do.

Let me see if I have this right. According to you, the Democrats wanted "to expand offshore drilling, no if's or buts there" but actually with some if's (if it's beyond 50 miles from the coastline) and buts (but not within 50 miles of the coastline). Do I have this right?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #255 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Let me see if I have this right. According to you, the Democrats wanted "to expand offshore drilling, no if's or buts there" but actually with some if's (if it's beyond 50 miles from the coastline) and buts (but not within 50 miles of the coastline). Do I have this right?

LOL! Yes you have that right, but, but ,but I was responding to trumptman's intent reality game validity equation. Simply put I am saying that I am not arguing that the intent of the Democrats voting for expanding offshore drilling was a good thing. They pushed the bill and voted for it, period, hence my no if's or buts. It could have been worse if the repubs had got there way and that's where you are applying the if's or buts. My point though was in regards to their intent and I'm not looking for excuses for them as trumptman seemed to think I was and they won't get any from me.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #256 of 700
The question we need to face now is, "how do we keep this from ever happening again?"

Seems like the Republicans are not interested in the answer to that question.
post #257 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The question we need to face now is, "how do we keep this from ever happening again?"

The hypothetical answer is simple: Don't use more oil! Of course, that is not possible today. While environmental whack jobs try to scream alternative energy the fact is our heating and transportation architecture rests upon oil as its base and no alternative to oil currently exists. Thus, to keep this from "ever happening again" we need be better stewards of our offshore oil platforms but the fact is that harvesting oil for our heating and transport markets is risky...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Seems like the Republicans are not interested in the answer to that question.

Both parties profited from petroleum dollars; Obama more than most directly from BP. So stop trying to paint the GOP as somehow singularly complicit in this this.
post #258 of 700
Interesting info from the NYTimes-

"In the days since President Obama announced a moratorium on permits for drilling new offshore oil wells and a halt to a controversial type of environmental waiver that was given to the Deepwater Horizon rig, at least seven new permits for various types of drilling and five environmental waivers have been granted, according to records.

The records also indicate that since the April 20 explosion on the rig, federal regulators have granted at least 19 environmental waivers for gulf drilling projects and at least 17 drilling permits, most of which were for types of work like that on the Deepwater Horizon shortly before it exploded, pouring a ceaseless current of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

At least six of the drilling projects that have been given waivers in the past four weeks are for waters that are deeper — and therefore more difficult and dangerous — 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 “ultra” deep water, including four new wells at over 9,100 feet."

There's nothing safer than drilling at 9,100 feet

"However, these waivers have been especially troublesome to environmentalists because they were granted through a special legal provision that is supposed to be limited to projects that present minimal or no risk to the environment."
~ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/us...torium.html?hp
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #259 of 700
Quote:
At a recent White House meeting on the oil spill, the president reportedly snapped, "just plug the damn hole."

"Obviously he's frustrated as the rest of the people are, particularly along the Coast," White House energy adviser Carol Browner told Fox News. "We want this thing to shut down."

I love the mindset here. The implication is that a short snappy chiding from His Highness is really all that's been lacking up to this point. The people working on this problem has just been waiting for their inspiration from Mr. Obama to just get it done. How very un-Presidential in my opinion.

The further implication is that BP somehow doesn't "want this thing to shut down" and, accordingly, are simply sitting around twiddling their thumbs and staring off into space.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #260 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The question we need to face now is, "how do we keep this from ever happening again?"

Seems like the Republicans are not interested in the answer to that question.

We have wanted nuclear power for decades. Liberals are the ones who have blocked new facilities from being built, not Republicans.
Odd someone from China would even care...
post #261 of 700
When the US was at war, they spent a huge portion of the GNP on developing the atomic bomb.
During the Cold War, they again spent billions of dollars developing better and better means of killing our fellow man. They also spent billions on sending a man to the moon, which helped develop technologies for missile systems.

Plenty of accidents have occurred with nuclear power, and it also isn't the easiest source to dispose of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tion_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents

Why doesn't the US declare energy and the environment to be of national importance and spend a similar amount on developing clean energy as well as more energy-efficient technology that would lower needs?

War is worth it, but the environment isn't? One might be a short-term problem, the other is much more serious.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #262 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Why doesn't the US declare energy and the environment to be of national importance and spend a similar amount on developing clean energy as well as more energy-efficient technology that would lower needs?

The US Constitution sets the government powers and responsibilities; energy development is not among its stated duties nor should it be!

On another matter, oh great! In the shadow of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill - the worst in U.S. history - guess who says he's "in charge"? What a goof!
post #263 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

When the US was at war, they spent a huge portion of the GNP on developing the atomic bomb.
During the Cold War, they again spent billions of dollars developing better and better means of killing our fellow man. They also spent billions on sending a man to the moon, which helped develop technologies for missile systems.

Plenty of accidents have occurred with nuclear power, and it also isn't the easiest source to dispose of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tion_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents

Why doesn't the US declare energy and the environment to be of national importance and spend a similar amount on developing clean energy as well as more energy-efficient technology that would lower needs?

War is worth it, but the environment isn't? One might be a short-term problem, the other is much more serious.


False dilemma. We're not getting off the oil crack pipe anytime soon. It would take decades. The reason question is: Why aren't we using the resources we already have in terms of oil and natural gas?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #264 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

The US Constitution sets the government powers and responsibilities; energy development is not among its stated duties nor should it be!

On another matter, oh great! In the shadow of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill - the worst in U.S. history - guess who says he's "in charge"? What a goof!

Quote:
"BP is operating at our direction," Obama said. "Every key decision and action they take must be approved by us in advance," adding that, if the Coast Guard ordered BP to do something, "they are legally bound to do it."



Maybe that's why this is taking so long and so far has been a clusterfuck.

And then this:

Quote:
"I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure that everything is done to shut this down," Obama said.

I say bullshit. It's not his responsibility. It's BP's responsibility. Geez.


Quote:
From the top, Obama called the leak his administration's "highest priority" and said the federal government is "in charge."

Well, we see what happened when he said that jobs were his "highest priority."

This guy's an idiot.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #265 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post



Maybe that's why this is taking so long and so far has been a clusterfuck.

And then this:



I say bullshit. It's not his responsibility. It's BP's responsibility. Geez.




Well, we see what happened when he said that jobs were his "highest priority."

This guy's an idiot.

And quoting things out of context, is what exactly? Not a sign of any sort of genius mind you. In fact just the opposite.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #266 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

And quoting things out of context, is what exactly?

Please provide the context that changes the meaning of these statements.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #267 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Why aren't we using the resources we already have in terms of oil and natural gas?

Last I checked, nearly all the domestic oil exploration sites are tied up in litigation.
post #268 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

This guy's an idiot.

Far worse... he's a liar...five weeks in to this crisis and he's yet to authorize Louisiana's request for berms to stop the oil..."I'm in charge" indeed. What exactly has he done since he's been "in charge"? He didn't even know today whether the head of the government MMS had resigned or been fired! The guy is an idiot for sure!
post #269 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camp David View Post

Far worse... he's a liar...five weeks in to this crisis and he's yet to authorize Louisiana's request for berms to stop the oil..."I'm in charge" indeed. What exactly has he done since he's been "in charge"? He didn't even know today whether the head of the government MMS had resigned or been fired! The guy is an idiot for sure!

The USACE is the governing body for permitting purposes.

Building berms along hundreds of miles of coastline would take many, many billions of dollars, and take many many years to boot.

The Mississippi Delta?

You need suitable materials, that means non-cohesive materials, e. g. sand (from land sources), muds, silts, and clays won't do, sorry Bucko.

Of all the stupid talk I've heard, and as a former employee of the USACE ERDC CHL (Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory), the building of berms where most of the materials available are muds, silts, and clays, is without a doubt ...

... the STUPIDEST idea I've ever heard!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #270 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Dumb and Dummer

Priceless

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #271 of 700
franksargent, the self-declared expert on everything hath spoken.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #272 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Of all the stupid talk I've heard, and as a former employee of the USACE ERDC CHL (Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory), the building of berms where most of the materials available are muds, silts, and clays, is without a doubt ...

... the STUPIDEST idea I've ever heard!


I'll assume you are not at all familiar with what an oil slick is so I'll cut you a break on your apparent ignorance!!!Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal proposed these berms weeks ago before the oil was a threat to the coast. Baracky did nothing about Jindal's request nor did the Corps of Engineers. The berms would have been successful and prevented damage to the sensitive wetlands. Since Baracky did nothing about the request he is the guilty turd here. Berms would have been an excellent solution and in the last few weeks several miles of sensitive coastline could have been protected. Now it is too late. Even Democratic strategist James Carville, on CNN this evening, knows the lies Obama is spinning. Berms would have helped, as Jindal proposed! Other requests by Gov. Bobby Jindal to the federal government have been refused. Obama screwed the pooch here on the oil spill.,.
post #273 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Well, since you apparently have no expertise in anything to speak of, other than posting countless links to the blog-o-smear, as demonstrated time and time again, no further comment is necessary or required.

Apparently further comment is required. Otherwise you wouldn't have commented.

I am in awe of your "expertise".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #274 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I am not in awe of your lack of expertise on any subject matter.

Man in Black: You're that smart?
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #275 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Broken record.

Oh, and it's Morans, for those of you on the ultraright.

Pot, meet kettle.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #276 of 700
franksargent: Icon of the intellectual left.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #277 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

When the US was at war, they spent a huge portion of the GNP on developing the atomic bomb.
During the Cold War, they again spent billions of dollars developing better and better means of killing our fellow man. They also spent billions on sending a man to the moon, which helped develop technologies for missile systems.

Plenty of accidents have occurred with nuclear power, and it also isn't the easiest source to dispose of.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tion_accidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lear_accidents

Why doesn't the US declare energy and the environment to be of national importance and spend a similar amount on developing clean energy as well as more energy-efficient technology that would lower needs?

War is worth it, but the environment isn't? One might be a short-term problem, the other is much more serious.

and most recently: radiate, baby, radiate.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #278 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

This spill is a complete nightmare and I am getting annoyed by Obama's non chalance about it. However I also don't know what the government can do. The military is not equipped to handle situations like this nor is the national guard or any of our fire depts. A full blown gov't response would only be possible if "we, the people" would own BP then we would also own the equipment to deal with it. This is truly a case of private, non US business ffffing up public US property big time. It is very possible that this spill will actually reach England once the current picks it up. On the way there, it has the capacity to severely damage the US economy, the very thing that seems to solely depend on oil to be fruitful. This MUST CHANGE ASAP. We can not as a nation who claims to provide liberty to it's citizens, depend on private industries to provide us with a secure and constant supply of our basic energy needs. This is asking for collapse and is comparable to economic Kamikazi.

Actually, every Naval vessel is equipped to deal with oil, petroleum, hydraulic fluid, etc, spills. They all have oil spill kits, booms and HAZMAT equipment. Perhaps Obama could have sent in the Atlantic fleet, or at least 2nd Fleet immediately, in an effort to contain the spill.
Apparently Obama wasn't too concerned, however as he waited more than a week to even mention the spill. Guess he didn't want to hurt BPs feelings.
post #279 of 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevegmu View Post

Apparently Obama wasn't too concerned, however as he waited more than a week to even mention the spill. Guess he didn't want to hurt BPs feelings.

Media picking up on the fact that Baracky has done nothing here... vacationing in Chicago while the Gulf turns black has far too many similarities to Gov't handling of Katrina...
post #280 of 700
Uh oh. Obama's coming. Look busy.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gulf Coast oil spill could eclipse Exxon Valdez