Right wing loons who just said Obama is not doing enough are about to say he's doing

#26
#26
They could have used these to plug to the hole...

buses-katrina.jpg
 
#27
#27
MG1968 said:
how about order the EPA and Army CoE to stop getting in the way of Jindal's request to build the sand berms to protect the LA coast line. Environmental impact statements??? Are you kidding me? What's worse, 39 million gallons of oil or a few tons of sand?

How on earth, in a crisis of this magnitude, can the bureaucracy be allowed to hold up relief efforts?

At least, after Katrina and with the price of gas skyrocketing, Bush issued an executive order suspending regional fuel blends and the prices immediately began falling.
Click to expand...

MG1968 said:
I answered your question LG.
Click to expand...


No, you only think you did because its politically expedient to think that they will work. And that is not what you think it is.

From Time Magazine:

Perhaps, but the berm issue has created its own toxic friction between Louisiana and the Obama Administration, which only late last week approved six berm sites. It will only commit to paying for one, however, as a sort of test to determine if more are worth erecting. That $16 million berm will go up just west of the Mississippi River off Scofield Island, and will be funded by either BP or the Federal Government's Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.

The Administration's point man on the BP spill, Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, maintains that while "we're not averse to attempting this as a prototype," there are "a lot of doubts about whether this is a valid oil-spill-response technique." And there is no guarantee, he adds, that the Federal Government will help pay for five other approved berms, three more west of the Mississippi and two east of the river.

That federal reluctance has angered Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and Plaquemines parish president Billy Nungesser, both Republicans, who are the two biggest sand-berm proponents. "We could have built 10 miles of sand boom already if [the feds] would have approved our permit when we originally requested it" shortly after the spill began April 20, Jindal said last week. Said Nungesser, "The federal government has got to move on this and BP has got to pay for it. Without closing as many gaps as possible, we're going to get oil in the marshes."

Critics have accused Jindal and Nungesser of political grandstanding. As urgent as closing gaps like Pass Chandal may appear, the plan has more doubters than just Allen. Environmentalists and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — as well as BP — fear even temporary berms could mess with natural tidal flows as well as the integrity of naturally existing barrier islands. There are also questions about how well they hold up in storms, and about the effects of the massive dredging of ocean-floor sand required to construct them.
 
#28
#28
droski said:
yeah he's a regular capitalist pig.
Click to expand...

Whatever. If I said it was white you would say it was black without having the first dam clue. You don't have to read or research very long to find out that Obama has upset many of the environmentalist over the past year.
 
#29
#29
droski said:
exactly rather then spending all his time making speeches, creating commisions headed by environmental wackjobs, etc. how about getting on top of the cleanup? the military for instnace should have been involved immediately.
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't the company responsible be fully accountable? If you f*** up, you pay the piper. They f****d up. Bad.

ACE, maybe, but not the military proper.
 
#30
#30
Realistically there's not much he can do although I think he should have had people on the beaches immediately . . . but from a political standpoint he's playing it terribly.
 
#31
#31
Obama said the "cozy relationship" between oil and gas companies and the government agencies that regulate them have long been a source of concern.
Click to expand...

could have been proactive if it was such a concern
 
#33
#33
truefan said:
Whatever. If I said it was white you would say it was black without having the first dam clue. You don't have to read or research very long to find out that Obama has upset many of the environmentalist over the past year.
Click to expand...

he's upset people that woudl be upset with anything, but obama eliminating all carbon emmisions. hardly evidence that he's not in the pockets of the environmentalists. putting graham and reilly in charge of the commission tells you all you need to know about his leanings.
 
#35
#35
DC Vol said:
Why shouldn't the company responsible be fully accountable? If you f*** up, you pay the piper. They f****d up. Bad.

ACE, maybe, but not the military proper.
Click to expand...

you dont' think they are being held fully accountable? what do you want exactly? a public hanging?
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
I would seriously like some of the Obama-bashers who think there is anything to this criticism of Obama for his reaction to this to explain, with specificity, what he could be doing about this different from what he is doing and how it would make an ounce of a difference.
Click to expand...

He could be on that Drill Ship slinging pipe around, (you know GW would be) and screaming "Damm the Torpedoes"

Or he could get on camera and say "I Drink Your Milkshake"
 
#38
#38
droski said:
you dont' think they are being held fully accountable? what do you want exactly? a public hanging?
Click to expand...

Time will tell on this. As of right now? Resolve the spill and attempt to mitigate the long-term affects.

Once that is done... commence with the investigation and, please, lets do away with this pathetic liability cap that's a drop in the bucket for BP.
 
#40
#40
Yay politics!! Just do or say whatever makes your party look better than the other one! Both sides

To F--- with what the country ever actually needs or will make it better, it's all about making the other party look bad!
 
#41
#41
DC Vol said:
Time will tell on this. As of right now? Resolve the spill and attempt to mitigate the long-term affects.

Once that is done... commence with the investigation and, please, lets do away with this pathetic liability cap that's a drop in the bucket for BP.
Click to expand...

the liability cap for all i can tell has to do with limiting the federal fines charged to bp, not the cost of the cleanup or paying damages to effected parties.
 
#42
#42
I just think the reality is that corners were cut when it was built and there is no viable solution to stopping the leak. A few stop-gap ideas here and there, but nothing that will have a huge impact until the relief wells are dug.

As to the spill at this point, its so massive that anything done in terms of sand berms or trying to round it up is just not going to be all that effective, either. Its going to come ashore, somewhere, and when it does it will have to be cleaned up.

Shrimp, crabs, tourism. All screwed and nothing can be done to change that at this point.
 
#43
#43
droski said:
he's upset people that woudl be upset with anything, but obama eliminating all carbon emmisions. hardly evidence that he's not in the pockets of the environmentalists. putting graham and reilly in charge of the commission tells you all you need to know about his leanings.
Click to expand...

Who said he isn't in the pocket of environmentalists?

:eek:hmy:I suppose this is another one of your erroneous interpretations with my posts
 
#44
#44
truefan said:
Who said he isn't in the pocket of environmentalists?

:eek:hmy:I suppose this is another one of your erroneous interpretations with my posts
Click to expand...

i see. so it's your belief that he is in the pocket of the environmentalists, yet they are still very angry at obama?
 
#45
#45
droski said:
the liability cap for all i can tell has to do with limiting the federal fines charged to bp, not the cost of the cleanup or paying damages to effected parties.
Click to expand...

The liability cap has been overblown. You are 100% correct here. They still have to cover the cleanup and damages.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#46
#46
droski said:
the liability cap for all i can tell has to do with limiting the federal fines charged to bp, not the cost of the cleanup or paying damages to effected parties.
Click to expand...

As far as I know the liability cap covers all economic expenses... levied by the government. Not just a fine... as I understand it it's a form of assurance that companies that take on a legitimate liability have to own up to that liability when something goes awry. BP says it will pay "legitimate" economic losses... thus, at this point, negating the liability cap. So, not a fine. Though, it's up to BP to define "legitimate economic losses" and that's the troubling verbage. I also don't think their "pledge" is contractually binding.

The proposed $10bil from some is ridiculous. That wouldn't and probably won't take place, though, as the insurance company would absorb the cap... and in turn it would be forced to raise insurance premiums almost to the point where off-shore drilling isn't economically viable even for the larger companies.


It's about trusting an independent corporation to live up to it's word in paying back all financial damages and restitution. Honestly, if my livelihood was at stake, I wouldn't trust BP in the least to pay me for ruining my, lets say, deep sea fishing venture.


Basically, $75,000,000 is far too low and $10,000,000,000 is far too high.
 
#47
#47
i'll bet any amount of money you want that BP has to pay far more than $10 bil when all is said and done. and its' not up to BP to decide legitimate economic losses, it's up to the court in the end. if BP starts rejecting legitimate claims they will owe the claims plus damages and interest.
 
#48
#48
droski said:
ii'll bet any amount of money you want that BP has to pay far more than $10 bil when all is said and done. and its' not up to BP to decide legitimate economic losses, it's up to the court in the end. if BP starts rejecting legitimate claims they will owe the claims plus damages and interest..
Click to expand...

Their liability. Their loss. If they pay up, that's fine. If they start rejecting claims... they'll end up in court.

As far as they stated publicly and explicitly, and also just stated, they will pay "all legitimate economic claims".

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/update--bp-ready-pay-legitimate-oil-spill-claims-ceo/

"We've made it clear that where legitimate claims are made, we will be good for them," Hayward said.
"We have the claims process set up, small claims today that are being paid instantly ... bigger claims we clearly have a process to run through," the BP chief executive added.


So yes, it looks like it's a case-by-case basis directly between each claimant and BP itself. Not through the Federal government. If they were abiding by the liability cap it would end at $75,000,000 and presumably either the individual would absorb the loss or the federal/state government would pay them with tax money.


They owned up and threw out the liability cap. Good on them, I suppose... if they stick to their word.
 
Last edited:
#50
#50
droski said:
agreed. they should pay every legit claim. my point is that i dont' see this logic that BP is getting off easy.
Click to expand...

I think it's a combination of multiple factors... the primary probably being BP's Net Income figure from last fiscal year.

For me, individually, it's mistrust. BP had a definite arrogance in the early stages as if they thought they weren't accountable and liable for their actions. Some statements from a bumbling PR department gave little headway to trusting them to pay every cent to every individual affected financially by this... not to mention the long-term effects this will have on the fishing/tourism industries that they will, more than likely, never pay a cent for.


Also, I edited my comment to reflect your edit.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top