Unlike Rand Paul, I believe BP's Neck is EXACTLY where Obama needs Plant his Boot

Saying that is Un-American makes as much sense as saying it would be Un-American to take out Bin Laden.

I am unhappy with President Obama's response to the disaster in the Gulf for 2 reasons. The first is I think he's given BP far too much time in charge while they stand around trying to figure out the best way to protect themselves. I was encouraged to see a story indicating he is losing patience with their dithering and hope he is about to take the reins away from them.

But the second is I think he is missing a prime opportunity to take back some of the populist message from the teabaggers. I think it would do him an immense amount of good to come out with both barrels blazing against this immoral corporation which has ruined so much of the Gulf now. Sentiment towards the oil industry is negative now and the President is missing an opportunity to show himself on our side against another greedy corporation. What're they gonna do? Run ads against him? Who's going to listen to BP's ads?

This could be his greatest moment and I hate to see him letting it slip away. Or, as his CofS said, "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Hammering BP and putting someone with experience, who does not care about BP's profits in charge would get better results for the Gulf and for him. Kicking butt and taking names would improve the effort in the Gulf and help him politically. See? Win/win.

Rand Paul has a very odd idea of America as corporate butt licker.

I hope he does something soon.

As a victim of the economy, I am so unable to provide any help but I so truly wish I could. :hug:

but there's no reasoning with these irrational beasts. Obama could personally swim the gulf and scoop up every bit of oil, dive down and close up the leak with his own two hands, and these goons would bitch that he was interfering with BP's right to pour oil into our national waters; that right being provided by the 44th amendment to the constitution (the 43rd being the right to hang anyone caught burning the flag, a t-shirt with the flag on it, or a Toby Keith album where he talks about the flag.)

standard bearers of the populist message. Co-op the populist anger and make ourselves the defenders of the common man.

n/t

It is odd how the "subject box" suggests titles to me that are things I've written.

What we are seeing is a total abdication of leadership.

They need to get it together, and fast.

and point fingers later. Somehow liberals will be to blame. Haven't quite figured out how yet, but somehow.

Probably he was working on some sort of deal and we blew it with our bitching.

I would have saved the gulf if it wasn't for those meddling kids.

slipping away. The momentum is being grpped by folks like Lamar Alexander and Bobby Jindal.Some folks here have reduced this to politics.Well, this could be politics but taken to a finer level. Indeed , it would be "Win/Win."

But he will not, and they know it, they vetted him and found him to their liking or he would never be president.

I'll be voting against him because of his performance.

All I care about are the people and the ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico.

Whose career benefits or suffers in the process of protecting them is trivial.

If I could guarantee Obama's second term by sacrificing a sea turtle, I'd say the second term just isn't worth it.

if there isn't a good democratic third party candidate.

I've stepped out of the we-don't-suck-as-much-as-they-do voting model.

Principles before party.

republi-CON in the White House.

I'm disappointed with Obama, too. Sometimes the whole Zen thing may not be the way to go. Maybe a fire-breathing dragon is what we need at the moment, WITH his boot on the necks of BP.

That's a huge and ridiculous jump from not voting for Obama.

A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil, and I'm not going to be held hostage by that false dichotomy.

If the Democrats can't find an acceptable non-corporatist candidate, then my vote against both parties has value as a statement against the status quo offered by either party.

just what do you expect the president to do in this matter?

Just about all of the best people are engaged in this, and there are no answers just yet...I hate the idea of all of this crud floating off and creating a disaster as well...but just what is one man supposed to do when there are no definitive answers?

I'm not trying to be facetious at all...this is BP's problem, and anyone who can up with an answer is more than welcome to. The one thing that could be done is stop all drilling, but even that would not stop the leak. This is a disaster, to be sure, but we have to find viable answers, not just cast out blame, especially when there is a good possibility that an additional shutoff valve may have done the trick and avoided this in the first place; or if BP hadn't overridden the engineers, especially after it was known the problem was in the making. None of us, including PO had any idea any of this was happening until the rig blew up.

It's far more than just BP's problem.

I have more than twenty years in the oil industry and spill response. I've been both regulated and regulator. The coverage from the Gulf of Mexico shows, to the informed eye, how bungled the spill response has been: incorrect selection and application of boom; incorrect information on discharge rates; misinformation about the environmental fate of the oil leaving the pipe in spite of predictive models introduced at International Oil Spill Conferences designed to predict the behavior of oil in the water column.

BP used an inappropriate well design, skipped tests that might have identified the inappropriate design, failed to use state-of-the-art blowout prevention devices, failed to maintain the BOPD they did use, exagetated their spill response capability and underestimated the worst case discharge, and did so with approval (inappropriate waivers of environmental review requirements) and incompetent oversight of federal agencies under the leadership of Obama.

as you have stated, BP did just about everything wrong.

PO knew nothing of the oil industry, (I'm willing to bet he knows a lot know), like Carter knew the nuke industry, (he's a nuclear engineer), and got a lot of crap about that.

I will say that the response has certainly been slow, but this is not PO's specific problem as so many would like to believe. It is up to various entities, from private to public to deal with this situation. Having the WH take full responsibility would not be conducive to getting the problem fixed, it would just shift the blame. BP is to blame, they need to step up, get booms out there, skimmers, berms and everything else they need to do with help from the Fed's as appropriate. I do not expect to see PO on the beaches w/a sponge, which is what some seem to feel is the only action left.

This is going to be a multi-faceted effort, and I think that all deep drilling should cease until there are inspections made and even then, paperwork alone will not be the only "guarantee"...there needs to be serious confirmation that things are being done to to ensure this does not happen again.

Here's my point:

The man in this article (Pozzi) has tried to contact BP to offer assistance and expertise. He has cleaned spills of this magnitude in the past. He has gotten an exasperating run around. His take on it comes down to money as does mine. BP is not doing all they can because they are not making use of resources available. In fact, they are actively ignoring those solutions which might increase the price tag.

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/could-cleanup-fix-for-gulf-oil-spill-lie-in-secret-saudi-disaster/19476863

From the article:

Stephen Reilly, CEO of Slickbar, a leading oil spill equipment and vessels manufacturer, says that while he's unfamiliar with supertankers being used in this way, Pozzi's proposal could well work.

"Any containment area or barge or tanker can be used for reception, and they certainly have the pumping system on board," Reilly says. "So in terms of using assets like that to pump stuff into tanks, by all means."

Pozzi speculates that the reluctance on the part of those he's contacted comes down to one word: cash. When oil tankers are taken out of service for a special project like this, they stop earning money for their owners.

BP, Pozzi says, should "step up to the plate" and offer to pay anyone willing to lend a tanker whatever they would lose in profits by dispatching one of their ships to the gulf region.

A multi faceted approach is, indeed, going to be needed. Bringing in people who have the expertise and who do not have as their priority the protection of BP's profits would seem to make sense. BP isn't going to do it.

I'm not adverse to that, but there would be hell to pay...I'm not even sure that is legal...:shrug:

I'm pretty sure it's legal and I don't think there would be hell to pay. I think the public would cheer. BP might whine and bitch but would garner no sympathy. Then the government could then hire the best people out there with the expertise. BP could certainly remain involved but they could not be shutting out groups and contractors who can get the job done without making BP's profits their priority. That's all I'm saying.

At which time the Federal On-Scene Coordinator would take over the role of Incident Commander, and the BP representative would begin taking orders from him. BP resources would continue to be used, but they would be under federal control.

BP is unlikely to use the tanker collection scenario because there would be a huge amount of oily water handling involved, and the oily water would have to be treated before it could be discharged again. The equipment, logistics, labor, water treatment and storage costs would be prohibitive. And the storage and treatment would likely require the use of onshore terminals and tank farms required for oil business as usual.

It will require multi-faceted effort

And there should be multi-faceted accountability.

Obama, as head of the executive branch, is responsible for its failures, especially its failures post-incident, when permits continued to be issued. What I would like to see is some decisive action that tells me he cares more about people and the environment than he does about BP.

Let me tell you that many people within the oil industry feel betrayed by this event. Not those at the top, but those who make things work on a day-to-day basis; those who have seen their ability to do their jobs limited by cost-saving measures; those who get scapegoated from the top when things go wrong. To quote a coworker: "If nothing else comes of this, I want to see BP cease to exist."

This catastrophe hurts everyone. Can you imagine the damage this is doing to our ecosystem? I can't either.

Amen sister! :thumbsup:

The concept of our POTUS, Obama, with his foot on the neck of some smarmy British Greed Monster, kind of posed like the images of St. George and the Dragon, will tempt one or two political cartoonists, I hope.

And "Little Rand" did this all by himself!

.