Why is Obama doing nothing about the oil leak?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by targus, May 24, 2010.

  1. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am sure that everyone is aware of the huge oil leak in the Gulf.

    It has been pouring oil into the ocean waters for some time now and the oil slick just gets bigger and bigger every day.

    The oil has finally reached the coasts and no relief is in sight.

    BP keeps making promises - about how tomorrow or next week or whenever - that they will stop the leak but they are obviously in over their heads.

    When is Obama to going to get of the pot and do something?

    He has the resources of the entire Navy and Corp of Engineers at his disposal.

    Is anyone else as sick of his inaction as I am?
     
  2. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    What makes this situation SO different than all the other situations that you don't want Obama and the Congress messing with? Isn't this a business problem that should be solved by the capitalists who own BP? It is THEIR well and they PAID for the well oil lease. Isn't oil more important than "unclean" clams, crabs, and shrimp? Isn't this problem being worked by Republican Libertarian Capitalist Baptist principles?
     
  3. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    HUh? Huh!

    Just trying to make an argument?

    __________________________________

    Heard a program about the dispersants being used to mix the oil with the water....
    Heard a response to the question of 'why?' when dispersants do nothing about solving the problem with the oil....
    Two possibilities:

    The dispersants help to reduce the frank visibility of the oil sheen which can be seen by satellite and help to contain public alarm and realization of the magnitude of this disaster.

    Second, the ill advise of using dispersants may be much like a patient going to the doctor who recommends a procedure .........until the insurance company is consulted. The insurance company, who's payment and coverage is needed and desired, states that they will not pay unless another procedure is tried first; Then they will pay. It makes no difference to them and they may not have the best expert or latest science on their side..... but they do control under what circumstances or conditions they will and will not pay an insured client. No doubt BP has some kind of liability insurance and what they are now doing may be dictated by such silly institutions as 'insurance'.
     
  4. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes. I for one, do not want Obama sticking his finger in this pie. It would just mean more taxpayer money down the drain, more government intrusion and control over anything the big O can get his hands on. I say BP made the mess, let them clean it up and deal with the repercussions.
     
  5. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree. One of the few responsiblities of the Federal government is to protect our country.

    This oil spill threatens a portion of our food supply and will further increase unemployment at a time when we can least afford it.

    The U.S. Navy is the foremost expert in underwater operations - with access to the best people and equipment. And we are already paying for those resources which are not being used - while Obama sits on his hands.
     
  6. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    11
    Agreed. As much as I hate federal government involvement in just about everything, this is one of those rare times when the Constitution does authorize the government to act.

    However, my problem isn't with the government's inaction or Mao-bama's ignoring of the problem, but with the hypocrisy from the left for refusing to hold Mao-bama to the same standard they held Bush to.
     
  7. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very true. The problem is, I can't see Obama just using the Navy and efficiently getting the job done, can you? It would mean lots of new environmental laws, an excuse for more taxes, etc. In theory it would be nice if he would just protect the country, but I don't see him doing that unless there is a big profit somewhere for himself and his cronies. In that case, I think we are forced to take the lesser of two evils, although no one is a winner in this situation, especially the fishermen.
     
  8. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    How is this a problem for the President?

    Really, where is he supposed to intervene here? It seems to be to be both a state matter and a private one. If anything BP's inaction has shown the level of sophomoric science we are dealing with when it comes to understanding oil and underwater.

    We're really good at getting out but, noticeably bad at dealing with a mess.
     
  9. blackbird

    blackbird
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,898
    Likes Received:
    2
    Who cleaned up Exxon's mess when that idiot ship's captain ran the Valdez aground???

    I say---we give "The Big O" a box of Q-Tip safety swabs---send him a mile under at site----and say---There you are buddy, now----protect our country!!!!!
     
  10. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    He should be authorizing the use of Federal resources to deal with it instead of simply saying that it is BP's problem.

    This is a national security situation.
     
  11. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
  12. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,129
    Likes Received:
    221
    Its easy to tell someone to do something - its something else to provide leadership is see that it gets done - right!
     
  13. Cutter

    Cutter
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,564
    Likes Received:
    0
    JAY LENO: "Well, to me, BP is a perfect example. BP seems to have done this on their own. They don’t pay attention. They essentially make their own rules because they pay off everybody. That’s what the Tea Party wants. That’s unregulated and look what happened."
     
  14. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    No he shouldn't. He absolutely should not be doing this. How is it so many people expect the President and Congress to stay out of acting in our schools, states, and municipalities but when it comes to this kind of a situation they say all bets are off send in the fleet.

    I've said this elsewhere and will reiterate it again, this was a terrible accident that is no one's fault. Now that doesn't put the toothpaste back in the tube, but we can't try to be angry with the President for allowing a company who is an expert at doing these things.

    It absolutely isn't.
     
  15. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it's not unregulated.

    The Obama administration simply didn't see that the regulations were enforced.

    Obama gave BP a pass on any environmental studies that are required by the regulations. Why?

    Three high ranking Democrats were on BP's payroll as advisors to the tune of $120,000 a year each and did nothing more than take a day trip to the same oil rig and came back and said that BP was following the highest safety standards. Why?

    A 1994 law says that the way to handle this sort of a spill is with fire booms - booms that trap the oil and then burn it at on the surface. Burning it at sea would have prevented it from getting to the shore. The law charges the Federal government with the responsibility for doing this. This has not been done since the oil leak started. Why?
     
  16. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a national security issue.

    The oil is going to kill the fish and shrimp spawning grounds.

    The fishing industry and a portion of our food supply is at stake.

    This is a national security issue.

    Obama simply has had and still has no idea what to do so he is doing nothing - except promising law suits against BP. Dig deal.
     
  17. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    So is FEMA on the beaches cleaning up the oil?

    I haven't seen anything on the news about FEMA being on the job.

    I did a google search and didn't find anything either.

    The oil has been leaking for six weeks. Where is FEMA.

    The Bush administration was criticized because FEMA wasn't on the ground while Katrina was still blowing.

    Where is FEMA after six weeks with this?
     
  18. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    So national security = $$$$$ being threatened
     
  19. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    No - national security includes a significant food source within our borders being destroyed.
     
  20. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    President Obama, no matter what the technicalities, is not providing the leadership that we have grown to expect from our presidents. It appears that he does not know what to do here. From what I have read and heard BP are responsible for the break and yet the government are letting BP tell them how much impact it is having. (Disclaimer, I have no source, I have just heard this in a couple of podcasts).

    Surely, the military would have the tools to assist in this disaster or at least the relief if the commander-in-chief would free them up.
     

Share This Page

Loading...