Cons.... what would you have had President Obama do differently...

Onceler said:
Yeah - it does. That is the biggest failure of leadership I saw with Bush during Katrina - people in serious crisis, with the clock ticking, and a leadership void. That's just how it was.

I also faulted his cronyism with FEMA.

I did NOT fault him for not clearing the streets of water faster, or for not rebuilding the levies faster, or for not stopping the actual hurricane, or for not better preparing the levies & city for hurricanes in general, etc. These are the kinds of things cawacko's list & the general criticism is comparable to.
Click to expand...

1) again, the people were in crisis largely because THEY chose to stay and/or Nagin failed to get them out.

2) Agreed, Brown was a disaster.

3) It is a failure of LEADERSHIP that is the comparison. Obama has little.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-company-glad-help-out-gulf-mexico

Why did it take so long for these arms to be ordered? If Obama was 'in charge' from day one... why wasn't this a top priority? These arms could have been used in conjunction with the various methods BP was doing.

http://outraged-commomsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/obamas-katrinathe-irony-of-epic.html

The oil sweeping arms specialist, Kampers Oil Spill Equipment (Koseq), from Puttershoek, Holland and oil spill specialist Hebo Maritime Service from Zwartsluis offers of assisstance have both been rebuked. Dutch dredging companies, including Van Oord, are also interested and able to assist with the efficient removal of oil and their equipement can, in principle, be flown in quickly and within a few days be installed on local vessels.

Gert Kampers, designer of the sweeping arms and director of Koseq, does not understand the reluctance of BP and the American government: "There are already 568 ships deployed we only need to equip four ships with our equipment to effectively control the spill. A ship equipped with sweeping arms can harvest 250 cubic meters of oil per hour from the water. That's 1000 cubic meters per hour with four ships which is more than presently flows into the sea."

BP is now using chemicals to prevent the oil from rising to the surface that are further damaging the environment. 12 sweeping arms are currently available for deployment that can immediately be put in service. More sweeping arms can be manufactured in little time if the demand requires. The sweeping arms have been deployed in Europe several times and they perform very well.

The Dutch Government and the European Union are prepared to quickly help America, but they must wait for a request. "It's all very sensitive," said Achterberg. "The Americans think they can do a better job themselves. They obviously find it embarrassing to ask for outside help. The Dutch government cannot step in because they do not wish to offend their American colleagues."

After the disasters of the Erika and Prestige off shore rigg spills, the European Union utilized the services of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA); one of the Europe's environmental maritime disaster-organizations. EMSA has ships all along the European coasts and has sweeping arms and other equipment that can be quickly adapted for evironmental disaster control by outfitting tankers and other ships to suck up large quantities of oil from the surface.

"We're here to help and have also communicated to the pertaining authorities but there is no request for assistance received by the European Commission and without a request, we cannot take any action," says an spokesman for EMSA in Portugal. "We have the equipment, experts and the ships, but unfortunately we can not use them ."

It seems that BP is currently more afraid of double bills than a bad image and would rather wait until the U.S. government completely takes over the clean-up......Obama has given BP three (3) months to remedy the problem before intervening.

So it begs the question: Why has Obama settled for rhetorical blame on Big Oil but done absolutely nothing to mitigate the issue at hand? Is Obama THAT indecisive and overwhelmed or is he simply an even bigger whore to Big Oil than he labeled Bush?

The EPA is Obama's FEMA and the US Coast Guard has supplanted Homeland Security in addressing THIS disaster.........Obama needs to stop whining and hiding and be presidential.

When 50,000-70,000 barrels of oil spew from the ocean floor and each of those barrels is subject to a federally mandated fine of $4,300.00; Obama will have the mother of all Federal fines to "spread the wealth around" with.
Click to expand...

Why don't we have these sweeping arms in the US? According to what I have read, it is because it only effectively removes 95% of the oil from the water.... which didn't meet our EPA's environmental standards.

fyi... this came from the Wellington Letter (which is a research report that comes out concerning the market) I am currently looking for a linkable source to that same information.

That said... 12 arms have been available this whole time. Why the fuck didn't Mr. 'I have been on it from the beginning' request help and get these arms to the gulf asap?
 
Superfreak said:
1) again, the people were in crisis largely because THEY chose to stay and/or Nagin failed to get them out.

2) Agreed, Brown was a disaster.

3) It is a failure of LEADERSHIP that is the comparison. Obama has little.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-company-glad-help-out-gulf-mexico

Why did it take so long for these arms to be ordered? If Obama was 'in charge' from day one... why wasn't this a top priority? These arms could have been used in conjunction with the various methods BP was doing.

http://outraged-commomsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/obamas-katrinathe-irony-of-epic.html



Why don't we have these sweeping arms in the US? According to what I have read, it is because it only effectively removes 95% of the oil from the water.... which didn't meet our EPA's environmental standards.

fyi... this came from the Wellington Letter (which is a research report that comes out concerning the market) I am currently looking for a linkable source to that same information.

That said... 12 arms have been available this whole time. Why the fuck didn't Mr. 'I have been on it from the beginning' request help and get these arms to the gulf asap?
Click to expand...
Because meeting Bono was so much cooler.
 
Superfreak said:
1) again, the people were in crisis largely because THEY chose to stay and/or Nagin failed to get them out.

2) Agreed, Brown was a disaster.

3) It is a failure of LEADERSHIP that is the comparison. Obama has little.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-company-glad-help-out-gulf-mexico

Why did it take so long for these arms to be ordered? If Obama was 'in charge' from day one... why wasn't this a top priority? These arms could have been used in conjunction with the various methods BP was doing.

http://outraged-commomsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/obamas-katrinathe-irony-of-epic.html



Why don't we have these sweeping arms in the US? According to what I have read, it is because it only effectively removes 95% of the oil from the water.... which didn't meet our EPA's environmental standards.

fyi... this came from the Wellington Letter (which is a research report that comes out concerning the market) I am currently looking for a linkable source to that same information.

That said... 12 arms have been available this whole time. Why the fuck didn't Mr. 'I have been on it from the beginning' request help and get these arms to the gulf asap?
Click to expand...

Why the fuck hasn't the leadership of BP had those arms flown in on their own?

Why is it Obama's responsibility to do their jobs for them?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Why the fuck hasn't the leadership of BP had those arms flown in on their own?

Why is it Obama's responsibility to do their jobs for them?
Click to expand...
Because they cannot, not without permission from the fricking EPA who says that they can't use them because they do not effectively remove 97% of the oil (only an apparently sad 95%). It's Obama's job to CUT THE RED TAPE. The same thing could be said of Bush with Katrina. He's been too busy firing his version of "Brownie", pretending he didn't know she was fired, then meeting with singers... Paul McCartney being the most recent.
 
The Americans don’t have spill response vessels with skimmers because their environment regulations do not allow it. With the Dutch method seawater is sucked up with the oil by the skimmer. The oil is stored in the tanker and the superfluous water is pumped overboard. But the water does contain some oil residue, and that is too much according to US environment regulations.[media:factfile1]

US regulations contradictory
Wierd Koops thinks the US approach is nonsense, because otherwise you would have to store the surplus seawater in the tanks as well.

“We say no, you have to get as much oil as possible into the storage tanks and as little water as possible. So we pump the water, which contains drops of oil, back overboard.”

US regulations are contradictory, Mr Knoops stresses. Pumping water back into the sea with oil residue is not allowed. But you are allowed to combat the spill with chemicals so that the oil dissolves in the seawater. In both cases, the dissolved oil is naturally broken down quite quickly.

It is possible the Americans will opt for the Dutch method as the damage the oil spill could cause to the mud flats and salt marshes along the coast is much worse, warns Wetland expert Hans Revier.

“You have to make sure you clear up the oil at sea. As soon as the oil reaches the mud flats and salt marshes, it is too late. The only thing you can do then is dig it up. But then the solution is worse than the problem.”
Click to expand...

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-oil-spill-response-team-standby-us-oil-disaster

Not as solid as I would like, so will continue to look for another link tonight... hopefully to the EPA directly. Until then, take that portion with a grain of salt.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Why the fuck hasn't the leadership of BP had those arms flown in on their own?

Why is it Obama's responsibility to do their jobs for them?
Click to expand...

According to what I read, the arms are not allowed due to EPA regulations. The reason is because they pump the sea water back into the sea with small portions of oil still in the water.

I am still looking for this exact regulation on the EPA site, but will have to wait until tonight.

If the EPA reg comment is correct, then BP cannot request the Arms. Obama must be the one to make the request and nullify the EPA requirement with an executive order (my guess... or Congress could act... but that would take longer)
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Why the fuck hasn't the leadership of BP had those arms flown in on their own?

Why is it Obama's responsibility to do their jobs for them?
Click to expand...

oh... and the other reason... is because it is OBAMA's JOB. He is in charge... just ask him.



Funny how REGULATIONS from the government is what has stopped these arms from being used to this point.
 
Onceler said:
Yurtsie, I'm not going traipsing all over the board at your whim, when you repeatedly ignore any questions I have for you. You have certainly marginalized the concerns with your support of all of the seepage BS and some of Dixie's rants.

And I have explained why the local Dems don't bother me as much as Bush. They are certainly at fault as well, but they are not my representatives. Bush was my President, and a self-proclaimed "leader," and someone whose supporters always talked about when it came to "leadership." And guess what? There was a leadership vacuum during Katrina.

So, there ya go, Yurtsie...

:cof1:
Click to expand...

i knew it...twice today you make unfounded claims and when asked to back them up....you run like a coward becuase you know you're lying

thanks :clink:

when ever you have what you think is proof, you are quick to post it and run around the board telling everyone of your precious gotcha moment....twice today you've been called out for lies and still cannot provide a single link to support your claims

we all know why bush bothered you onceler...because he has an R after his name...
 
Damocles said:
Because they cannot, not without permission from the fricking EPA who says that they can't use them because they do not effectively remove 97% of the oil (only an apparently sad 95%). It's Obama's job to CUT THE RED TAPE. The same thing could be said of Bush with Katrina. He's been too busy firing his version of "Brownie" then pretending he didn't know she was fired, then meeting with singers... Paul McCartney being the most recent.
Click to expand...

Horse hockey!

That rig is in international waters and BP is a British company.

They could bring in anything they liked that might help...if the financial incentive was great enough that is.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Horse hockey!

That rig is in international waters and BP is a British company.

They could bring in anything they liked that might help...if the financial incentive was great enough that is.
Click to expand...

That has to be one of the lamest attempts to spin in this boards history.

Please show us where deep sea rigs that are drilling leased sites from the US are not subject to US regulations.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Horse hockey!

That rig is in international waters and BP is a British company.

They could bring in anything they liked that might help...if the financial incentive was great enough that is.
Click to expand...
"horse hockey"

The rig is directly under regulation of the United States EPA, it is only drilled with the EPA's permission, and all of their regulation applies. Stop being deliberately disingenuous and start holding the feet of your Great Leader to the fire, if you don't all we'll have is handfuls of poop-looking oil to hang out on the beach with.

It is Obama's job to cut through the red tape of bureaucracy, and IMO he doesn't even have a minute idea of how he could be helping right now. IMO he's surrounded himself with inept people with no experience except in elections. He's appointed ineffective people, who instead of fixing problems in their purview (in this particular case) simply continued the same practices, then has tried to blame something more than a year into his administration on the previous administration....

He's good at passing blame and appointing inexcusably unqualified people to positions that matter. In that, and IMO in much of his "war" policy, he mirrors or even worsens Bush policies.
 
Yurt said:
why are you calling obama a liar? he said he has been in charge and calling the shots from day one?
Click to expand...

"Why am I calling Obama a liar"...

???

What the hell does that even mean? Why am I calling him a liar?

Because I hate green jello...because "East Sheboygan" is fun to say...because it turns out the moon isn't made of cheese...there. Each of those answers makes about as much sense as your ridiculous question...so feel free to pick one.
 
Last edited:
Superfreak said:
That has to be one of the lamest attempts to spin in this boards history.

Please show us where deep sea rigs that are drilling leased sites from the US are not subject to US regulations.
Click to expand...

And if BP TRULY cared they would already have those arms deployed in the Gulf and no one would be any the wiser...but they don't...why is that?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And if BP TRULY cared they would already have those arms deployed in the Gulf and no one would be any the wiser...but they don't...why is that?
Click to expand...
I think crawfishing like that really hurts Zappa, you shouldn't spin any harder, the force of the spin may remove your pigmentation and make you into an albino. Apologize any harder, try to pass the buck any faster, and you may be breaking speed limitations set by your state. I'm worried for your safety.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Horse hockey!

That rig is in international waters and BP is a British company.

They could bring in anything they liked that might help...if the financial incentive was great enough that is.
Click to expand...

:lolup:

who did BP have to get permission from to drill the well? from whom the lease? to whom does the oil go to? who told us they have been charge from day one and calling the shots?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And if BP TRULY cared they would already have those arms deployed in the Gulf and no one would be any the wiser...but they don't...why is that?
Click to expand...

And if OBAMA TRULY cared they would already have those arms deployed in the Gulf and no one would be any the wiser...but they don't...why is that?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
"Why am I calling Obama a liar"...

???

What the hell does that even mean? Why am I calling him a liar?

Because I hate green jello...because "East Sheboygan" is fun to say...because it turns out the moon isn't made of cheese...there. Each of those answers makes about as much sense as your ridiculous question...so feel free to pick one.
Click to expand...

you wondered why obama has to do their jobs? a trolling question clearly indicating you don't think obama has much responsibility here, despite the fact he said he has been in charge and calling teh shots from day one...

keep making excuses for your messiah....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top