judge overturns obama's oil drilling ban

#2
#2
I think that it reasonable to stop all BP drilling operations (unless a significant risk can be proven by doing so) until they are inspected and determined to be safe operations. The others should never have been stopped, IMO. This obviously isn't a systemic safety issue across the industry, but one that appears to be much more behavior-based and on one company in particular.
 
Last edited:
#3
#3
I have a feeling the judicial branch is going to be sinking a lot of things Obama is wanting to float these days. I don't see how he'll win the Arizona immigration challenge.
 
#4
#4
TennTradition said:
I think that it reasonable to stop all BP drilling operations (unless a significant risk can be proven by doing so) until they are inspected and determined to be safe operations. The others should never have been stopped, IMO. This obviously isn't a systematic safety issue across the industry, but one that appears to be much more behavior-based and on once company in particular.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I've been told there are risk factors in stopping and then restarting drilling months later, too. Why add more systemic risk?
 
#6
#6
Stopping off shore drilling acomplished nothing but possibly affecting the price of oil in the future.

In my opinion, there were some shoddy inspections that should be to blame along with BP.
 
#9
#9
IPorange said:
I have a feeling the judicial branch is going to be sinking a lot of things Obama is wanting to float these days. I don't see how he'll win the Arizona immigration challenge.
Click to expand...

Yep. Executive Power meets its match (finally)
 
#12
#12
Big setback for Barry's bankrupt America program.

ab5ca170.jpg
 
#16
#16
the experts who supposedly reviewed this plan said that halting drilling in the gulf is actually more risky than allowing them to continue.
 
#19
#19
I haven't read the opinion, but what I see quoted in the press from it is disturbing. The judge does not have the autority to simply overrule an executive decision like this based on disagreeing with the need for the policy. There has to be a justiciable controversy, such as a vioilation of a federal statute or a constitutional issue for him to rule this way. He is simply not permitted to substitute his own judgment, no matter how right he (or others) think it is.
 
#20
#20
lawgator1 said:
I haven't read the opinion, but what I see quoted in the press from it is disturbing. The judge does not have the autority to simply overrule an executive decision like this based on disagreeing with the need for the policy. There has to be a justiciable controversy, such as a vioilation of a federal statute or a constitutional issue for him to rule this way. He is simply not permitted to substitute his own judgment, no matter how right he (or others) think it is.
Click to expand...

when the basis for the moratorium was a lie, the judge has every right to overturn it.

Experts seek to clarify their views on drilling moratorium | NOLA.com
 
#21
#21
Wow, a judge with some sense, I am impressed.

All O'bummer did was worsen a situation in a state that is trying to overcome high unemployment from the oil spill. So hey, let's get the remaining employed people and hit the oil industry. Wow, LA says thanks for your help Pres.

The bottom line is that the safety procedures have been in place for a long time. However, if you don't follow them...guess what..... analogous to people not following traffic laws. Soon or later, an accident will happen. It does not mean the laws are no good. Most evidence indicates BP did not follow the procedures in place.

One thought is to put a MMS person on every deep water rig with the authority to shut down all operations if he/she feels necessary. However, don't use the current bozo's at the MMS. Hire people with the expertise to know what they are doing, and pay them well-enough to retain them.
 
#22
#22
The other night the president said that he put the moratorium on because he was concerned about the safety of the people on the rig( I heard him say that with my own ears). So, if that was his reason(BS.BS.BS), then he should shut down all the airports the next time there is a plane crash. Many more people are usually killed in plane crashes. How about car crashes?40,000/year?
 
#23
#23
overseasorange2 said:
The other night the president said that he put the moratorium on because he was concerned about the safety of the people on the rig( I heard him say that with my own ears). So, if that was his reason(BS.BS.BS), then he should shut down all the airports the next time there is a plane crash. Many more people are usually killed in plane crashes. How about car crashes?40,000/year?
Click to expand...

Please don't give this communist any ideas.
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
I haven't read the opinion, but what I see quoted in the press from it is disturbing. The judge does not have the autority to simply overrule an executive decision like this based on disagreeing with the need for the policy. There has to be a justiciable controversy, such as a vioilation of a federal statute or a constitutional issue for him to rule this way. He is simply not permitted to substitute his own judgment, no matter how right he (or others) think it is.
Click to expand...

Then why are people paying attention to it including the white house with their impending appeal?:eek:lol:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top