I'm apparently in the minority around here re: Obama & BP.

[Jackpine Radical]

By leaving BP in charge, he's taking the only sensible course. The calamity is immense. I don't think that the government getting involved will shorten or mitigate the disaster in any way. All the government could do would be to assemble oil industry experts, and that has already happened. By leaving the whole thing in BP's hands, he is keeping the tail pinned where it should be. It's BP's disaster. If the government gets involved, the taxpayers end up paying for the cleanup. Leaving it this way, BP is paying, both in big bunches of money and in public opprobrium. If Obama takes it on, it will get fixed no faster, but it will become his problem rather than BP's. Why should he take on an albatross that he doesn't need to?

I'm often critical of Obama, but not on this one.

[Barack_America]

1. .

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/wkrg

[Dream Girl]

2. Absolutely right. If he did have the govt step in people would whine that

why should the govt clean up BPs mess? He would be criticized as a corporatist who cleans up after big oi...it would be described as a bail out. Obama has thought through both scenarios. he's smarter than us.

[G_j]

3. but they keep lying, blocking access to scientists, media..

that is not acceptable

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Well, they generally control the media anyway,

and the message is still getting out. They have lost control of the message, as I point out elsewhere:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8391197

[Kerrytravelers]

4. Then there is this little fact posted on DU earlier this morning:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/22/frustration-mounts-as-oil_n_585913.html

As simple as it may seem, the law prevents the government from just taking over, Allen said. After the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, Congress dictated that oil companies be responsible for dealing with major accidents – including paying for all cleanup – with oversight by federal agencies.

[Barack_America]

9. You call piloting dinghies and declaring "hey, these are BP's rules" to be "oversight".

No wonder this country is so fucked.

[Kerrytravelers]

20. I don't claim anything. I'm simply pointing out that things aren't as black and white as we'd like.

I'm sure there are details on what oversights can and can not be used. It's one big old mess, period.

[tomp]

160. even if that is actually what the law says, it could be changed in five minutes...

...by an act of congress...just like the (un)patriot(ic) act was fast-tracked in time of "crisis". i find it extremely hard to believe the president has no leeway to act given the severity of the crisis.

[emulatorloo]

13. Don't confuse me with the facts n/t

[Usrename]

124. This is totally bullshit.

There's a National Response Plan

http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/lawsregs/ncpover.htm

If you just casually glance at the law, there is supposed to be an On-Scene Coordinator (a federal agent) that is responsible for coordinating the Operational Response Phases, which include preliminary assessment and initiation of action: containment countermeasures, cleanup and disposal; and documentation and cost recovery.

see Subpart D of the plan, pages 61 and 62 of the pdf file, sections 300.300 thru 300.315:

http://www.epa.gov/oem/docs/oil/fr/59fr47384.pdf

[Liberal Veteran]

5. I think what is more fascinating is the cries from right wing that Obama should take over the spill.

Not that I necessarily disagree that the government should tell BP and all to get the fuck out of the way, but suddenly the free market asshats want the government to come charging in and fix everything.

[MadMaddie]

30. Yea, but as soon as he does it they will turn on a dime and

scream it's a government takeover. It's a no win situation!

[State the Obvious]

42. Yes...."and please, PLEASE, don't throw me in that briar patch!"

That's exactly what Republicans want....they need these talking points for the mid-term elections.

[MadMaddie]

49. Yep because they have nothing else...

Even though the Health and Finance bills aren't perfect what are they going to do. The bills passed. This oil spill is all they have.

[panader0]

6. Agree........k&r

The focus of Obama's actions should be in the regulatory area, fixing the loopholes. Oh yeah, fire Salazar.

[leftstreet]

8. He's already taken on the 'albatross' just by virtue of his position

People aren't going to make the distinction later, 'Oh but this wasn't Obama's responsibility, don't you know he left BP in charge?'

These politicians campaign as if they have the power to bring Magical Unicorn Changes to the People!

It's his watch, his mess, he needs to unicorn up!

[grasswire]

10. you're making an assumption...

...that BP is more effective and competent than the U.S. Navy or Corps of Engineers or other combined agencies at our service.

Tell your confidence in BP to the wildlife, the ecosystems, the very life itself that is dying each day BP dithers.

I would agree with you were it not for the fact that each day more damage is done. Irreversible damage.

[CC]

32. Yet you are making the assumption that

after 8 years of Bushco the U.S. Navy or Corps of Engineers or other agencies are more effective and competent than BP. It has only been a year and half (almost) since Obama took office, I don't think he has had time to fix everything Bushco fucked up in the US on top of the economy.

[grasswire]

52. aside from the fact that many assets are tied up in the Middle East...

...are you seriously saying that the U.S. military is less powerful than a petroleum company?

Wow. In my opinion, the U.S. Navy can do just about anything. I'm not pro-war, but I am pro-competence!

[Pirate Smile]

56. The navy doesn't have any subs that can go down that far and do what needs to be done.

The navy and the entire DOD don't drill and plug oil wells. They don't have the equipment for it. That was one of the first things asked. We don't have that type of stuff. They don't do that kind of work.

[Lorien]

93. Plenty of such subs exist and most are owned by educational institutions

one phone call could put them in place.

Man oh man, does this thread have the ghost of St. Ronnie grinning from ear to ear!

[cliffordu]

110. Nope. There are precisely FOUR that can do this kind of work.

[CC]

64. You know that reasoning

I expect from right wingers. I started to explain on what I said/meant but fuck it, if you took that as an insult to the Navy then I am wasting my time and breathe.

[NoSheep]

74. +1

[Lorien]

92. Are the U.S. Navy or Corps of Engineers or other agencies required by law

to only take actions which benefit the corporate bottom line? Believing that Big Business is more effective than government is at the very core of Reaganism.

[Lorien]

91. Indeed. And everyone here seems to be ignoring one corporate rule: that corporations

CANNOT, by law, do ANYTHING which does not improve their bottom line. Thus toxic dispersants are being pumped into our oceans instead of effective green solutions.

[Better Today]

11. I agree, furthermore,

if the gov't gets involved it will leave room for BP to say in courts that it was the admin/gov't that caused ___________________ (filled in the blank here regarding civil and/or criminal charges) or at least to claim gov't interference caused it.

Obama is right to stay out of it, however, I don't like the idea that his administration has been helping hide and delay facts, estimates, videos, etc.

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. I agree with you. However, there is a difference between

taking ownership of the operation and allowing BP to direct our government resources and determine who can go where.

I want samples collected and spill rates calculated by someone who is not within BP's umbrella.

I don't think thats too much to ask the government to step in and overrule BP about.

[AllentownJake]

14. He's fucked no matter what he does

There is no way to stop the leak that is known other than another well or a nuclear weapon.

Using a nuke would be a political and ecological nightmare. Waiting 90 days for the first attempt of a relief well is a political and ecological nightmare.

My opinion, Bush and Clinton administrations were criminal with their deregulatory zeal (More Bush than Clinton).

Obama administration is negligent by its accepting of that paradigm and allowing drilling in an unregulated fucked up environment.

As far as the spill....other than clean-up...they are fucked on this.

[Mojorabbit]

143. I said this in another thread today

and I will say it again. They need to be proactive and they are not being so. I have read of booms setting on docks and not put out. Louisiana asked for levies to be put up a ways in front of some sensitive marshland to help block the oil and they were not and something like twenty four miles of marsh was destroyed by oil and will never come back. They know where the loop current will likely carry the oil. There must be a zillion preventative things that can be tried esp in the most sensitive estuaries to keep most of the oil from washing up. Let BP handle the leak, I want the govt. being proactive in trying to mitigate the expected damage.

[mopinko]

15. +1

[Desertrose]

16. Good point, been thinking about that too....

Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't...not like it's gonna undue this whole horrible mess....



ETA...then I think, holy crap this is a disaster of world changing proportions....DO SOMETHING!!!!!

Why do we have to worry about $$, lawsuits & all that crap when that oil is still gushing out???


ARGHHH!!!!

[Upton]

17. Hate to tell you this

but it already IS Obama's problem...and his tepid response to this tragedy is inexcusable.

[chill_wind]

18. I still find it astounding

that it took him over a month to begin demanding daily updates from BP on behalf of the public and all the other intertwined agencies. That seems like such a minimal and fundamentally straightforward expectation that anyone would have insisted long before now.

[salguine]

152. Face it, Obama IS BP, just like he's every other bloated corporate behemoth. Obama was

nothing more than a Trojan Horse for big-money corporate interests. We got punked but good.

[time_has_come]

19. BP is not "in charge." Everything they do is being approved by and in conjunction with coast guard

and other federal agencies.

What makes people think BP is running this show all by themselves? they ain't

[BeFree]

31. Eh?

The Coast Guard? Who is CiC of the coast guard? Clue: he ain't a muslin.

So... Obama is in charge, but he's acting all hands off?

So, as this turns into a complete clusterfuck, Obama will be blamed anyway?
Say it ain't so.

I want, in a year, to be able to say that Obama did everything he could do.
Looks like I will not get what I want.

[time_has_come]

59. I don't understand your questions....but I say again, BP is not "in charge." I base that on this...

comments from the Coast Guard Commandant:

That sense of frustration is shared by an increasing number of Gulf Coast residents, elected officials and environmental groups who have called for the government to simply take over.

In fact, the government is overseeing things. But the official responsible for that says he still understands the discontent.

"If anybody is frustrated with this response, I would tell them their symptoms are normal, because I'm frustrated, too," said Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen.

....

He and Coast Guard Adm. Mary Landry, the federal onsite coordinator, direct virtually everything BP does in response to the spill — and with a few exceptions have received full cooperation, Allen said.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was even more emphatic.

"There's nothing that we think can and should be done that isn't being done. Nothing," Gibbs said Friday during a lengthy, often testy exchange with reporters about the response to the oil disaster.

There are no powers of intervention that the federal government has available but has opted not to use, Gibbs said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gulf_oil_spill_bp_in_charge

I understand the frustration. Believe me, I share it. But this chorus that's sprung up of "why doesn't Obama take over" has gotten a bit twitish. What, besides perhaps communicating with the nation more, exactly do people propose he do?

[BeFree]

63. Yep, you said it

Obama HAS control. Whatever happens, whatever the CG and BP do, it is his administration's doing.

Good luck sitting back and watching this shit go down, President Obama. You're going to need a lot of luck.

Especially after this official statement:
"
"There's nothing that we think can and should be done that isn't being done. Nothing," Gibbs said Friday during a lengthy, often testy exchange with reporters about the response to the oil disaster."

And still the oil flows. Telling us they can't think of anything else to do is a FAIL.

[Codeine]

125. "a muslin"?

What does that mean? :shrug:

[customerserviceguy]

21. You make a good point

By saying, "You screwed it up, you clean it up," you take away the ability of BP to say, "Well, we were prevented by X, Y, and Z from mitigating this."

Since we already know it's their standard operating procedure to blame someone else, taking away that someone else puts all the responsibility on them. There's a difference between doing a half-assed job when you think you're getting away with it, and doing less that perfect when everybody's watching.

[FSogol]

22. K & R. well said.

[cilla4progress]

23. Dammit!

You do what needs to be done! You don't worry about blame or liability! You marshall ALL your forces to get the job done and worry about legal and political consequences later!

I don't know if this means takeover cleanup; nationalizing BP; or just setting up a "commission." But you do any and everything necessary to blunt the damage and kickstart recovery. Without dithering.

[Pisces]

24. He would have to take over the equipment and oust BP. That would be a precedent

that should not be set. There are only 4 submersibles in the world that can go to that depth that are not owned by oil companies. One is in China, one in France. This is a serious logistics
problem. BP owns the superior technology and the people to run the technology. I saw one of the foremost scientist explaining this on MSNBC and it blew me away. If the govt were to takeover a
company by force this open up a can of worms legally.

I think working with BP is the smartest thing to do, however, I also think economic incentives should be put in place ASAP:

Pull all permits for current drilling platforms, shut down operations until all sites can be inspected to ensure all safety codes are in place and being followed. This will cost BP millions and light the
proper fire under the asses to do the most expedient fix. The government can take it's sweet time with these inspections. I guarantee nothing will motivate BP more than loss of money.

[William Z. Foster]

36. nonsense

This is the reason we have government in the first place. Only the right wingers and corporate apologists are yammering about the dangers of the government taking over, or precedents being set blah blah.

In an emergency, the government absolutely can, and must step in - whatever it takes - to set priorities, coordinate the efforts and protect the public interest.

If there is ever a case, ever a time, to abandon the idiotic privatization approach this is that time.

I cannot believe that Democrats are advocating privatizing the response to an emergency of this scope. It is suicidal. Suicidal for the country, and for those whose main concern here seems to be partisan politics - suicidal for the Democratic party.

"BP owns the superior technology and the people to run the technology?" Then you nationalize their asses and you do it NOW until the crisis has passed.

"Legal can of worms?" No one worries about that when it is the interests of the corporations at stake. Then every damned thing the wealthy want somehow warrants massive government involvement and intervention.

[G_j]

57. Thank you!

"In an emergency, the government absolutely can, and must step in - whatever it takes - to set priorities, coordinate the efforts and protect the public interest.

If there is ever a case, ever a time, to abandon the idiotic privatization approach this is that time."


:applause:
+100000000000000000...........

[Pirate Smile]

62. You nationalize it and then hire the oil people back as independent contractors because we aren't

experts in drilling or plugging oil wells? If we take every thing over, who do we have run it? We don't have a team of oil drillers within the navy or any where else. We would end up hiring the same damn people to try to do the same thing. What does that accomplish other then putting the Fed's in the bulls-eye instead of BP?

And, yes, I know the Feds are already in the bulls-eye to a certain degree.

[William Z. Foster]

90. of course

That is the whole point of having a government. Yes, you nationalize it and then hire the oil people back. Of course. What are people thinking?

What it accomplishes is this - the public welfare and interests are protected rather than BP's interests and welfare. How could it be more obvious?

- How did they get to the moon?

- How are wars run?

- How were emergencies handled in the past? One would think that SOMEONE would think to look up how previous emergencies such as this have been handled.

- How was the infrastructure in the country built?

- Where did public water systems come from? The roads? The canals? The airports? The bridges? The communications infrastructure?

- How does public education work?

- How does mail get delivered?

- How are parks managed? Are we going back to pre-Teddy thinking and should we just scrap the National Park system while we are at it?

Good grief, we have Democrats promoting pure 100% unadulterated right wing, pro-corporate, libertarian propaganda as though they can't even imagine any other alternative to looking at things that way.

Folks, we have a massive challenge of education on our hands. No one could possibly be posting in opposition to a federal response to this crisis if they had even a rudimentary understanding of history, civics, government and politics.

What are they teaching in school these days? The meaning and purpose of life according to Ayn Rand or something? This is alarming. Some sort of whacked out libertarian "ideology" - that is giving it too much credit - is interfering with people's ability to accurately perceive the world, to reason and think critically about things.

[Catherina]

145. Thank you

:applause:

If our government can't handle this, after all the money we've poured into the agencies, then I want every single red hot cent of those taxes back.

[cliffordu]

25. Absolutely correct.

As an added bonus, we get to say Obama's "Big gubment" didn't interfere with the free market company that created the mess.

[G_j]

26. BP's History of Oil Spills and Accidents: Same Strategy, Different Day

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8390891

http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10004340/bps-history-of-oil-spills-and-accidents-same-strategy-different-day/


BP's History of Oil Spills and Accidents: Same Strategy, Different Day
By Kirsten Korosec | May 7, 2010

An Alaskan pipeline burst, a fatal refinery explosion and now a 210,000-gallon-a-day oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. And there’s BP, right smack dab in the middle of all three. This isn’t a case of bad luck. The only surprising conclusion — based on reports of other near misses — is that BP hasn’t had more accidents.

A better BP?

At first glance, the BP of today looks like a safer and more efficient company than the one responsible for the fatal Texas City refinery fire in 2005 and the Prudhoe Bay pipeline burst in 2006. CEO Tony Hayward went on a management overhaul and efficiency spree after his appointment in 2007. He’s slashed overhead by one-third and cut 7,500 jobs to date, and last year kept up the momentum and squeezed $4 billion in cost savings out of the company. Hayward also honed in on one of BP’s biggest problems: project management, an area where the company regularly overspent by about 20 percent. All the while, Hayward worked hard to improve BP’s shoddy image as an irresponsible oil and gas company.

BP became more profitable, but it failed to fix the one problem that continues to get it into trouble: a reactionary management culture that puts an emphasis on cutting costs and efficiency while neglecting preventative maintenance. Companies of every ilk can fall into this trap, and if nothing bad happens, management can be lulled into a false sense of security. BP just can’t seem to figure this one out.

Texas City and Prudhoe Bay

Both the Texas City refinery and Prudhoe Bay accidents have a similar M.O. Investigations that followed the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion found management focused on cutting maintenance and capital spending costs, and managers’ performance was measured in part by their ability to meet these goals, NPR noted recently.

A year later more than 200,000 gallons of oil were discharged during two different spills when BP’s transit pipe in Prudhoe Bay burst. The leak, which was caused by corrosion in the pipeline, wasn’t discovered for five days and became the worst spill in Alaska’s North slope. An investigation found BP had stopped sending probes to clean and inspect the pipeline for corrosion in an effort to curb costs.

..more..

[William Z. Foster]

27. can't believe I am reading this

A corporation has all sorts of concerns that are at odds with public welfare, and that at the very least will be a mitigating factor in anything they do.

The idea that the federal government taking charge and representing the public interest will somehow deprive us of expertise or technology is absurd.

What is missing from BP's response has nothing to do with expertise, rather it is urgency and concern for the public are that are missing. Of course - it is a corporation and billions of $$$$ are at stake, and corporate culture is oppositional to pubic welfare.

This is what we have government for - to step in and take authority over emergencies and aggressively protect the public interest. This cannot be left to private interests - of course it cannot.

What is the matter with people here? How can ANY Democrat, liberal, or progressive advocate PRIVATIZING the management of an immense catastrophe such as this? It is unacceptable, indefensible.

[Karmadillo]

34. +1

nt

[treestar]

41. With the government, there has to be a law allowing it

Providing for the government's involvement in it.

So they are doing what they can within those limits.

[G_j]

50. yet the government invaded & occupied a sovereign country over WMDs that didn't exist

:shrug:

[William Z. Foster]

65. class war

This is class war - the wealthy waging war on the rest of us - and we have all sorts of Democrats, liberals, and progressives siding against us, against the public interest, against the working people.

How can anybody say that when it comes now to protecting the public welfare, that there are "limits" and "there needs to be a law" and so therefore we have to privatize the management of this catastrophe? Unbelievable. We have been watching the government routinely breaking the law to help the corporations, to serve the wealthy.

Unbelievable. There so clearly is a double standard at work here - one set of standards for the interests of the wealthy few, and another set of standards for the general public.

Reading the things people are saying here makes me wonder if perhaps the hypocrisy and deception goes much deeper than I ever imagined. All of the debates and feuds among Democrats, all of the confusion and paralysis - is it all because we have a faction aggressively siding with the wealthy and against the rest of us, and they are just making shit up to serve that agenda no matter how illogical and self-contradictory the things they say may be?

After watching what the government has done to persecute poor people, to smash up other countries, to wage various "wars" against people here, and to cater to the whims and desires of the wealthy, in complete disregard of all law, how can anyone with a straight face say that public safety and welfare can now not be protected, that the government cannot intervene, because "there are limits to what the government can do" and because there are legalities to worry about. WTF????

[treestar]

69. What is unbelievable is that the rule of law appears to be a bad thing here

Of course there has to be a legal ground for the government to act! If there was none, it would be a dictatorship!

The government does help poor people. There is welfare, medicaid, and those are based on laws!

[William Z. Foster]

84. tell the rulers that

I agree with you 100% - go tell the rulers that. Don't lecture the public, who are rightfully demanding that the government for once act in our behalf.

No one is saying the law should not be followed. What we are saying is that this "there needs to be a law" and "there are limits" idea, inserted into this discussion at this time for the purpose of beating back calls for government intervention in the management of this catastrophe (which would of course be appropriate, and legal) are not really about the law, but are defenses for the privatization of the management of the catastrophe.

[treestar]

100. The government has to have ground to act in this catastrophe

If it is an emergency like Katrina or the floods. I would think it does but there have to be protocols followed.

I like to think of them as elected reps, not rulers.

[William Z. Foster]

108. the government does

It is the entire purpose of having any government in the first place.

Who is arguing against there being "protocols?" Not I, so I don't know why you are now arguing that "there need to be protocols."

Are you seriously trying to imply that my call for a federalized response, rather than a privatized response, to this emergency means I am supporting dictatorship - "rulers" rather than "elected reps?" I object to that and resent the attempt at a smear.

You are desperately fishing around now to save face with your "protocols" and "rulers" straw man arguments.

[treestar]

66. they still got authorization from Congress

I didn't agree with the war, but that doesn't mean the legal mechanism didn't exist.

I would not be sure there is none for this, but the demands on DU for the POTUS to take over seem to be just based on emotional gratification, as if the POTUS is some sort of Santa Claus/Guardian angel. No, he is the leader of the executive branch of the US government, which has to act under some color of law.

[G_j]

72. emotional gratification?

the demand for leadership in taking control of a national security emergency being solely handled/covered up, for over a month by lying criminals?

[William Z. Foster]

94. it exists

The legal authority already exists for the government to step in and manage this emergency.

The point is the government has been exercising that authority - and then some - to persecute poor people and blow up half the world and cater to the whims and desires of the wealthy few all along. Why now suddenly is this some big concern of yours, when the welfare of the public is at dire risk? It is just mind-boggling.

Emotional gratification? WTF are you talking about? Libertarianism may be giving people some part of emotional gratification - it certainly is causing sever damage to their ability to reason or think clearly, so their rigid adherence to Reaganism must be based on emotion. But you actually think that calls for a robust federal response to this catastrophe are merely about emotional gratification?

Responding to emergencies such as this is the main reason we even have a government at all.

Good grief, the feds placed the poor people of New Orleans under martial law (one of thousands of examples of the exercise of federal authority to protect the rich people) and you question whether or not it is appropriate or the government has the authority to rein in BP? Stunning.

[William Z. Foster]

55. absolute nonsense

What on earth are people thinking? Geez when it comes to going after poor folks, people are all ready to toss the Constitution, bring out the cops and the hell with law and everything else. No one talks about any "law," or about any "limits" - "just go after the poor folk and do whatever it takes!" is the attitude. Tax them repressively, seize their property, break down their doors, stop and search them, lock them up on any pretext.

When the government is protecting the interests of the wealthy and the corporations - which is mostly what they have been doing - we don't hear any of this mealy-mouth chatter about "there has to be a law allowing it, providing for the government's involvement in it" or "they are doing what they can within those limits."

"Within those limits." Really? When the government is helping the corporations, when the f*ck are there ever any "limits" holding them back? When are they ever concerned about "law" allowing them to do anything? They make the shit up as they go along in order to serve their corporate masters, while the Constitution and the Bill of Rights - now there is some law for you - - is being shredded beyond recognition.

Have people not been paying attention to anything that is happening?

[treestar]

67. When the government "helped the corporations" (I suppose you are referring

to the TARP or the like) they thought they were helping the people in the process by preventing an economic meltdown.

Even so, a law had to be passed. Congress was involved.

The government is not responsible for everything. Sure there are grey areas.

[William Z. Foster]

86. so confused and confusing

Think this through some more, learn more, do some reading.

The government has the authority to step in and manage emergencies.

[treestar]

101. does this qualify under the law as an emergency?

I know it does emotionally, but one has to step back and see. People here are accusing the government of not acting, a la Bush with Katrina.

[G_j]

44. maybe Halliburton and Xe can cash-in, I mean help, too! nt

[laughingliberal]

47. +1000 nt

[CC]

28. Your not the only one though

I think we are in the minority. Course a lot of the same people specially talking heads were screaming not to long ago that Obama was doing too many things at one. Now he hasn't done enough because he hadn't unraveled the whole Bush/Cheney energy policy. These same blowhards calling Obama out for not firing people at MMS are also the same ones that screamed he was firing all the Bush appointees that were given civil service jobs. I know the right had fractured magical realities but did not realize so many in the center and on the left had the same fractured magical thinking. Beginning the wonder if that is the real damage the conservative movement has done to this country, changing the way people think at the core.

I can't believe all the people think he should go on TV and mouth platitudes to make them feel all better like Bush did and if he doesn't then he has failed. WTF Give me quiet behind the scenes real work not public displays to make me feel better.

[OHdem10]

29. Guess what, I agree.

[treestar]

33. Rec'd

Too many posts on DU acting as if the government has unlimited powers and that it is responsible for everything.

BP should have insurance on this, too. They should pay all the costs.

[TheKentuckian]

35. So, just let them handle it and if they fail then what????

Declare that shit happens, say a prayer, and cry into a beer?

This isn't about ducking the buck but resolving a massive debacle.

BP is not working for the interests of the environment, wildlife, or the American people.

[lunatica]

37. The word we're all searching for is DILEMMA

Fucked if you do and fucked if you don't. And the gusher is at a depth where even submarines can't go, and I don't know how many submersibles there are in the world. And I bet most of them aren't in the Gulf of Mexico either.

And I imagine there aren't too many people who can control robot submersibles either.

It's a dilemma no matter how you look at it. The only place to throw people at it or anything else is on the shores.

[Swamp Rat]

38. That's like letting the mafia clean up gambling and the heroin trade.

[treestar]

45. What they are doing is against specific laws that allow for prosecution

in those instances.

[Swamp Rat]

60. Like using the Coast Guard to intimidate residents and keeping the press and scientists from

investigating the scene of the crime, even though Martial Law was not effect?

Like BP firing any and all scientists who tell BP they are laying the booms wrong, and don't know what their are doing, and will cause irreparable damage to the ecosystem?

Like not evacuating the rig before it exploded even know BP knew HOURS before it was going to blow, thus causing the deaths of 11 workers?

Like destroying thousands of species and killing countless humans in the decades to follow?... you know, like killing the base of the food chain in this part of the world.

Yes, in those and many other instances I do not care to take the time to write here.

[treestar]

71. I have this feeling your are making the worst possible assumption in every case

Assuming the worse of everyone involved.

[Swamp Rat]

75. That's because your back yard is not covered in oil and you have not lost your way of life.

I am certain that you and many other DUers have no idea what the hell is going on.

[treestar]

99. Your back yard is covered in oil and you have lost your way of life?

[Swamp Rat]

102. Imagine this is 30 miles SE of Wilmington, in Delaware Bay heading northwest

and also imagine that 99% of your human diet is based on fish from Delaware Bay (like that poor dolphin), and plants and animals in the region surrounding the Bay.

[G_j]

76. I believe the person

is closer to the situation than you may realize.

[skyounkin]

139. Where the fuck have you been for the past 30 years?

Where have you been for the last 8 or 9 oil disasters? When has the worse of everyone NOT been involved?

Please- I assume the worst because over the past thrity years- we have gotten nothing but worse.

[icee]

153. That is exactly what it is. Additionally, it makes America look

like its not run by Americans, but by coporate interests, which it is. Let's just appoint BP board head of the US.

[sandnsea]

39. I wish that weren't true, but I think it is

I wish we lived in a world where it didn't matter who solved a problem, only that it get solved and the responsible party pays. Unfortunately, even if there is an answer out there, because of the attitude of our corporations, there isn't any other way to handle this except to make them responsible until they admit they need help.

[marions ghost]

40. The taxpayers will pay anyway

in the end--you can be sure. Oh sure, BP will pay for some of it. But in the end, the taxpayers will pick up a large part of the astronomical cost. And those living on the Gulf will "pay" in some form for the rest of their lives.

No, this is a national emergency, not a matter of legal liabilities and getting the most compensation from BP. It's already gone beyond that consideration. So yes, I want the govt in on this mess to a far greater degree than we've seen. Yes they have to work with BP, but the grace period for BP to control things is over now. I think Obama stands to lose in a big way if he doesn't take action (so I guess I agree with James Carville on the political danger for Obama).

[MadMaddie]

43. With this particular oil rig President and Obama are all fucked!

Present

At this point the catastrophic damage is done and continuiing. The government should step in and open the door to the world for help because it's apparant BP is unable to cap this well.

Remaining and Future Wells
ALL OTHER WELLS IN ANY AMERICAN WATERS (Territory) should be forced to shut down until all can be inspected!!!

Salazar should have done this two weeks ago and that is why he needs to be fired!!

Let's remember something the Republican fabrication that the oil wells on U.S shores will help American gas prices go down is a big fat lie. ONLY 2% of the oil that is produced by these wells go to the U.S the rest is put on the world market!!

[Swamp Rat]

61. Everyone on this board will eventually suffer

We've been screaming from the rooftops here since Katrina.

This time, the sky is going to fall on EVERYONE.

[lamp_shade]

46. Ahhhhhhh. Thanks for making sense, JP.

[zipplewrath]

48. At the beginning, yes

I think we've passed the point where we can wait on BP to manage the crisis. The government needs to "take over". Predominately that merely means "taking" the assets already being used and directing their use and option choices. They also then get control of the information stream and the public relations portion.

[randr]

51. Your argument is purely political

What we are seeing in the Gulf is destruction that begs a humanitarian response.
We the people of planet Earth need to assume the responsibility of caretakers. This is far beyond any political or ideological reasoning, it is the defense of life itself.
We do not know if the problem will be fixed any faster with government response. We do know that no response is the ultimate cop out of responsibility.

[Pirate Smile]

53. I agree with you.

[CrispyQ]

54. I agree that BP needs to be involved in this cleanup,

after all, they are responsible, they have the resources & they have at least some expertise in this area. However, the decisions regarding what actions they take, need to be made by some other agency, one that doesn't have a profit motive, & one that will inform the People what is going on & how bad it really is.

[Phlem]

58. Minority or not

I'm not seeing the upside to this situation. Yes BP get's all the blame, at the expense of livelihoods, the life in gulf waters, people lives, the possibility of ruining more oceans, etc...

Does that need to happen to prove a point?

-p

[Jackpine Radical]

96. The problem is that the government has no magical answers.

If I thought government action could actually mitigate the catastrophe, I would also support the government going in. I don't think that's the case here. Even a psychopathic corporation like BP will have already pulled out all the stops, hired all available experts, and put their attention to stopping the spill, if only in the interest of corporate survival. I don't think there's anything government could add to the mix. They would just be engaging the same experts who are already on the job, and would end up carrying the can as the disaster unfolds in its unstoppable way.

[southernyankeebelle]

68. I THINK GOVERNMENT SHOULD TAKE OVER ALL OF THE GAS PIPELINES. MAYBE THEY CANN

DO A BETTER JOB. ENOUGH ALREADY. OBAMA WE VOTED YOU IN AND WE CAN VOTE YOU OUT.

[jtuck004]

70. Isn't that the rationale used for Wall Street, and how they justified Blackwater?

The taxpayers are going to be left with the cleanup anyway.

You may be right, but this smacks of leaving the fox in charge of the cleanup of the henhouse she raided.

Perhaps it's time for "our government" to develop some expertise. Might avoid some future calamities.

[scarletwoman]

73. I gave your OP a rec even though I'm not sure I agree, but I appreciate that you've taken this on.

My problem with this kind of "you broke it, you own it" thing is that I don't want BP to own the Gulf.

I don't want BP alone deciding whose claim for damages is "legitimate". I don't want BP to be free to use toxic chemical dispersants based solely on their say-so. I don't want BP deciding which mitigation strategies are "cost-effective".

I don't BP left in the position to say, "Well, since everything's dead now, you may as well let us drill some more. You told us that 'we broke, we own it.' As the new owners, here's what we want to do."

I want our government to say, "WE own these waters and wetlands and beaches that your oil-drilling activities is destroying, and WE will do everything it takes to make sure you put it right. And that means we will be breathing down your necks every day, sending our own teams to monitor every step you're taking, and if you ever want to be granted an oil lease again, you will not object or interfere."

sw

[Swamp Rat]

79. Exactly!

[scarletwoman]

88. Oh Swampy! I burst into tears every time I see a post from you, because I know how much you love

that land and water. My heart breaks for you -- and it breaks for myself, too, because every migratory bird nesting place that gets destroyed means a future absence up here at the head of the Mississippi River where I live. All the birds that won't live to gladden the hearts of we northern observers of their cyclic movements.

Our beautiful earth is being diminished, wantonly destroyed by every lost ecosystem, no matter where it happens. The web of life is rent and torn and balance is lost, the rhythm and music is lost, harmony is lost.

How did we reach such a terrible pass? (rhetorical question -- the answer has been obvious for decades...)

:cry:
sw

[Jackpine Radical]

98. The government will be forced to rely on oil company technology

and expertise in any case. I think this is a very, very, very bad problem and will not have a clean resolution (no pun intended). Government intervention is not likely to mitigate the problem, but it will transfer responsibility for an unfixable problem from BP to the government. If the oil is going to be spewing for a long time anyway, and I have no idea of how to stop it, why would I voluntarily accept responsibility for doing something that cannot be done? Let BP be the object of public outrage rather than the Feds.

This doesn't mean I think Obama is handling the details well. They are participating in obstructing the flow of information and committing a number of other sins of both omission and commission.

[scarletwoman]

103. I understand that. But at this point, isn't that rather like letting off a murderer

on a technicality?

Perception matters. I think people WANT to believe that their government is going to take care of them when the shit hits the fan.

It's just not going to work to direct public outrage toward BP alone. Unless they see the government actively taking part in trying to save them from the damage reaching their fishing grounds and livelihoods, it's not going to be BP alone who will be the focus of their wrath.

This is being VERY badly handled. When a murderer is set free due to a legal technicality in the court proceedings, people don't get mad at the murderer, they get mad at the court, at the system.

This spill is clear evidence that the entire system has let us down.

sw

[Jackpine Radical]

105. But BP gets off the hook either way.

I think leaving them responsible for the spill will ultimately do them more harm than a government takeover of the cleanup would. You know that any penalties would be light, unless other jackal forces in the market can buy enough politicians to take BP down so they can feed on it. In the last case, the same pieces come together in different formations, but the functions and ethics of the corporation remain unchanged.

That is not e good enough outcome.

If we are going to lose the Gulf, then I want something very BIG to happen to replace it. A tipping point. I want BP and their ilk to take such a big hit that the noosphere will record this this as the moment of the Great Consciousness Shift.

I declare a new policy: Disaster Socialism. But before we can hatch it, we have to drown some dinosaur corporations in their own tar pits.


Did you see my earlier thread on the spill? I would value your comments.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8391197

[Swamp Rat]

109. WAIT?!?

Until we are utterly destroyed down here??? We do not have this luxury of time, my friend.

Now is the time to ACT!!!



If BP officials get off the hook, I bet Louisiana fishermen will seek their own brand of justice.... and it won't be nice.

[Jackpine Radical]

121. 'Rat, my wonderful and talented friend,

If there were something that could be done to stop it, I would say we should pull out all the stops and go for it, whatever it takes. But I really don't believe that's the case here. I think government intervention at this point would not stop what is happening.

[Swamp Rat]

130. Maybe, maybe not.

I am ready for our president to give a presidential speech, a call to arms, so to speak.

I can only speak for myself and those around me who live down here who have expressed the same thing: We need to SEE leadership in action from our president, starting with an honest and direct speech about what he plans to do. You can imagine how jaded many of us are after the poor governmental response to hurricane Katrina. This feels like déjà vu.

Jackpine Radical, I want to thank you for such a polite and thoughtful response, and please forgive me if I have been at all rash with you or others. I am saddened by some of the responses I have received here at DU lately, especially by some long time members who cannot or will not see past inane political disagreements. :hi:

We all live in this fishbowl together, and we must take decisive steps to mitigate and prevent disasters like the one taking place in the Gulf of Mexico.... one that I fear will be a 'game changer' for all of humanity if it kills off all or most of the holoplanktonic opisthobranch gastropod mollusks (sea butterflies/snails or sea angels).

[scarletwoman]

112. What's more important? Apportioning blame or saving an ecosystem?

I honestly don't follow your logic.

And, sorry, I don't believe there will be any "Great Consciousness Shift". We'll foul our nests until we all die off. Just ask the Easter Islanders how they managed to deforest their entire island without managing to notice that they were killing themselves off.

sw

[Jackpine Radical]

127. What better way to test a half-baked hypothesis

than to subject it to the tender mercies of DU criticism?

And as far as the consciousness shift goes, if something like that doesn't happen, we're goners. I don't know that it will happen, but I think the odds are greater if we get people thinking about it.

[scarletwoman]

138. "tender mercies", oh dear. I never took you for a masochist!

Don't mind me, I used to look forward to that "shift in consciousness", too.

I'm not sure when exactly I gave up on the idea -- in fact, I wasn't really aware that I had given up on it until I read your post and found myself thinking, "Meh. Like THAT'S gonna happen."

Did you ever read the book, The Elder Brothers? It's about this tribe, the Kogi, who've been hidden away in the Sierra Madre of Colombia since the time of the Spanish Conquistadors. In 1988 they let in this guy from the BBC because they decided that they needed to give their "younger brothers" (us) a warning about what was going to happen if we keep abusing the earth.

One of things that stuck with me was how they talked about oil drilling as sucking out the earth's blood. And then, when this oil geyser first started, my old friend DesertRose posted that "we hit an artery."

And like ol' crazy Brando/Kurtz in "Apocalypse Now", it hit me like a "diamond shot between my eyes."

It's too late. It's too late, there's nothing now but the long, slow dying of a species too stupid and short-sighted and greed-ridden to stop fouling its own nest. There'll be no Great Awakening, the time for that has run out.

Hopefully, I'm quite wrong and I'm just having a passing existential crisis...

sw

[scarletwoman]

140. BTW, I've finally gotten around to leaving a post at your other thread.

Not that it's cheerful or optimistic or anything...

Sorry.

[glitch]

163. Which means we should hire them and be their boss and determine the project goals

Not the other way around.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

77. You know that Simpsons bit where they all try to fix the Rubix's cube?

Marge: Oooh, a Rubik's Cube! Let's all work it together.
Lisa: Okay, start with diagonal colors.

Homer: Use your main finger on the yellow side and your other finger on
the orange side and turn it.
Marge: My main finger?

Bart: Orange to orange!...
Lisa: Now you have to turn it back, Mom...
Homer: You gotta start backwards!
Bart: Mom, Mom!
Lisa: No, not so fast! No, ignore the red!
Bart: No, no, no!
Homer: Alternate corners!
Marge: One at a time!
Bart: Spin the middle side topwise. Topwise!
Marge: Now I remember why I put this down here in the first place!

Everybody's got to add their own solution on how to fix the oil spill. No matter how stupid or misguided.

[NJmaverick]

78. K&R

[dkf]

80. Except BP has proven it isn't very good at fixing the problem.

They need help.

[southern_belle]

81. K & R

[SmileyRose]

82. I have no doubt he's deeply involved behind the scenes.

One of Obama's greatest skills is getting done what needs to be done and not wearing the dirt himself.

[salguine]

154. Are you kidding!? If there's anything that's been made painfully clear over the last year and a half

it's that Obama doesn't have a forceful, decisive bone in his body. I think I've run out of the ability to be astounded at how passive he is in the face of virtually any challenge. We elected the very definition of an empty suit.

[pretzel4gore]

83. "bankrupt the entire petro-chem industry, arrest their leaders

arrest their promoters in the press, round up their families, seize their estates, convert them to socialism, and hang them all publicly."

Just watch- this is going to happen
klol

[jp11]

85. You are correct which is why I felt people shouldn't expect the government to magically fix it but

there is a point where letting BP do what it thinks is right might not be the best course of action, when I don't know I'm not constantly checking in on them IF they even share that information. I and the vast majority of people don't have the time or inclination to dig up all the facts on every news story or event going on in the world, I do what I can when I'm looking into it for whatever reason but information overload gets to me.

The perception from the mainstream media, which is what most americans and probably not just americans, are seeing/reading is that BP is dealing with the mess and the government has been on the sidelines doing what BP wants/needs to assist them.

If the government kicked BP out and took control BP would have an even easier time slipping out on the bill than they will through all the legal umbrella contracts they already have.

Perception plays an important role democrats seem to forget this, with framing arguments and standing up for what they believe in, we see it time and again republican reshape the issues by dealing with the perception of it, often warping or plain out lying.

FYI, timeline of response/actions etc:
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/543771/

[WillyT]

87. And That's The Problem, You're Playing Political Chess Just Like He Is...

And EXACTLY at the same time the angry masses are looking for, and voting for, some non-spin, no nonsense, action. THEY DON"T WANT POLITICS HERE!

And let me get the strategy...

The same president that "furiously" admonished BP, TransOcean, and Halliburton for pointing fingers at each other... has a fall back position of pointing his finger at BP???

Really???

:banghead:

:wtf:

[Lorien]

89. By law, BP can ONLY take action that insures an increase in stockholder profits

this makes them he worst possible choice for "fixing" the problem they've caused. We've seen the results already-a month has gone by and the gusher still pumps oil into our gulf, and the use of toxic but profitable dispersants which are now killing as many organisms as the oil is. do you remember America pre-Reagan AT ALL??? We the people used to be able to overcome just about any catastrophe. Now our mantra seems to be "NO WE CAN'T-but big business can"!

[Are_grits_groceries]

95. This administration is already going to be tied to them

because they nave been complicit in allowing BP to control the process. When people suddenly realize that there is a huge problem, the MSM will be all too glad to show how the Coast Guard helped them prevent people from seeing the spill.

They are already pointing out that the dispersant used was toxic, and that BP has a connection to the company that makes it, and that they are still being allowed to use it despite finding out about this problem. One other fact is that BP's laboratory is analyzing the samples from the Gulf.

By not getting out ahead of this and at least finding independent people for an assessment, they have given people plenty of reason to see them with BP or even worse, under them. There are a lot of scientists and others with knowledge about the Gulf and drilling to have been called on to look at the problem without BP looking over their shoulder.

This is a headline today at nola.com:
Plaquemines Parish President Nungesser claims berm oil capture plan killed, but federal officials say the plan is still being reviewed
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/05/plaquemines_parish_president_n.html

Not a good way to handle things.

[golddigger]

97. Keep big government out of my oil.

[jwirr]

104. Agreed. And if the government does take it over that will be the GOP

cry for decades. And if we fail they will use that as well. I think the government should use it's justice department to force the clean up and be willing to loan equipment if needed but not take the whole responsibility for the clean up.

[Strelnikov_]

106. I am a member of your minority.

BP would like nothing more than to have the response Federalized.

Damages would be fought by claiming that they were the result of Government management of the situation.

Standard OP in heavy construction. Maneuver the owner/regulator into mandating an action in response to a foul up, then fight the damage claims via the proposition that most of the damage was due to the action ordered.

[Swamp Rat]

107. It does not matter what BP will say or do in future litigation.

They are pouring in toxic, experimental dispersants that are as bad or worse than the oil!!... from which they also make a profit because they invested in the chemicals. It's an active crime scene that will continually expand until it reaches the waters near DC. They are criminally and civilly liable for the deaths and damage to the ecosystem that will continue for decades.

BP must be stopped NOW!!

[saorsa]

111. By all means...

let's leave " BP in charge". They have such a great record of disaster response and accountability, and they always pay for their messes....


Just a couple of snippets from their record of achievements, a snapshot of their attitude to prevention and response to disaster:
from
Heckava Job, BP…the company’s $485 million in fines
04/29/2010

"In October 2009, BP paid the largest fine in OSHA history – $87.43 million – for willful negligence that led to the deaths of 15 workers in a March 2005 refinery explosion in Texas and an additional $50 million paid to the Department of Justice for the same incident. And just last month, BP paid $3 million fine to OSHA for 42 willful safety violations at one of its refineries in Ohio.

In March 2006, BPs neglect of one of its major oil pipelines in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska led to an oil leak that resulted in BP paying $20 million to settle allegations it violated the clean water act.

BP also was forced to pay $303 million to settle allegations it manipulated the US propane market, was fined $18 million for market manipulation during the California energy crisis and paid a separate $3 million settlement for similar market manipulation charges."
http://publiccitizenenergy.org/2010/04/29/the-oil-spill-bps-485-million-in-fines/


from
Slick Operator: The BP I've Known Too Well
Wednesday 05 May 2010
by: Greg Palast, t r u t h o u t | News Analysis

" In Alaska, that was BP's job, as principal owner of the pipeline consortium Alyeska. It is, as well, BP's job in the Gulf, as principal lessee of the deepwater oil concession.

Before the Exxon Valdez grounding, BP's Alyeska group claimed it had these full-time, oil spill response crews. Alyeska had hired Alaskan natives, trained them to drop from helicopters into the freezing water and set booms in case of emergency. Alyeska also certified in writing that a containment barge with equipment was within five hours sailing of any point in the Prince William Sound. Alyeska also told the state and federal government it had plenty of boom and equipment cached on Bligh Island.

But it was all a lie. On that March night in 1989 when the Exxon Valdez hit Bligh Reef in the Prince William Sound, the BP group had, in fact, not a lick of boom there. And Alyeska had fired the natives who had manned the full-time response teams, replacing them with phantom crews, lists of untrained employees with no idea how to control a spill. And that containment barge at the ready was, in fact, laid up in a drydock in Cordova, locked under ice, 12 hours away.
As a result, the oil from the Exxon Valdez, which could have and should have been contained around the ship, spread out in a sludge tide that wrecked 1,200 miles of shoreline "
http://www.truthout.org/slick-operator-the-bp-ive-known-too-well59178



The "big bunches of money" BP has paid out in fines and restitution is an unbelievably galling pittance compared to what they paid to buy freedom from regulation & oversight whenever they could from Congress and the Bush and the Obama administrations. When you take in $ 93 millions dollars a day in profits, you can pay off those little slaps on the wrist in a day or two.

Yeah, back off, leave the response and recovery in BP's hands, they have the $$ and we must protect Obama at all costs. While one of the greatest ecological and economic catastrophes of all times plays out daily.

On the other hand, all the truly good people who worry about damage to the Obama administration should get on the phone and tell them to get some balls. If they heard from enough of their supporters, maybe they could be moved to show that they give a damn.










:sarcasm:

[gateley]

113. At least the government wouldn't tell the EPA to go fuck itself when they mandated

no more use of the dispersant BP is using.

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[scarletwoman]

115. You are badly mistaken if you think JR is a cheerleader. He's making a carefully considered point.

If you don't agree with it -- and, as it happens, I don't -- he deserves the courtesy of a carefully considered rebuttal.

sw

[sam kane]

116. This is like saying, "don't take the heart attack victim to the hospital,

you might have to pay."

My carefully considered rebuttal is STOP THE LEAK. Spend ALL our $ so we don't have to give it to Goldman.

OIL is PUMPING into the OCEAN, this will cause lifelong damage.

[scarletwoman]

120. You don't have to rebut *me*. If you read the thread you'd see I already made my argument to the OP.

I essentially agree with you. Do everything possible to mitigate the damage to the ecosystem, whatever it takes.

My objection to the post I replied to was the poster's snarky insinuation regarding the author of the OP, whom I've known for 9 years and know that he is no Obama cheerleader by any definition.

sw

[Jackpine Radical]

129. My point, again, from which all else descends is...

I bloody well don't think anybody has a clue of how to stop the leak.

Good Christ, they're talking about using a nuclear weapon. Underwater. In the Gulf. Where there are 50,000 miles of oil pipelines, some of it 60 years old, laid out on the floor of the ocean in a pattern stolen from a psychotic spider, and they want to set off a nuke among them. If that's not enough to convince you that nobody--NOBODY--fucking knows what to do, then I don't know what would.

[Forkboy]

171. What a clueless post.

[noamnety]

117. Why you are dead wrong.

This is not "BP's problem." And this is not Obama's problem. Obama will serve one or two terms, he'll get his life pension, his life will go on just fine. BP is not the one bearing the costs. Obama is not the one bearing the cost.

This is OUR problem, and it's not relevant whether BP (or their insurance) pays in dollar for booms or attempts to stop the flow. When an entire ecosystem is wiped out, it's people who pay the real price, not corporations.

I think you've lost perspective on what the real cost is; you're thinking like a pure capitalist.

[lib2DaBone]

118. This is a joke..Right? OK.. I get it.. the Joke is on me.....

Oil spills are a good thing. You convinced me.

[northernlights]

119. I disagree totally

BP's priorities are wrong. Profits, PR and escaping financial consequences to the best of their ability will not plug the geyser or repair the Gulf and coast repaired. Leaving them in charge enables them to continue to protect and pursue their profits while trying to hide the damage instead of mitigating the damage.

Presumably Obama's priorities would be 1. plug the geyser, 2. repair/mitigate the damage.

Obama should declare a national emergency and put a team of experts on top to call the shots. BP should be handed the bill, of course.

Analogy: next door neighbor holds a "brush burn party" and breaks a few laws in the process. Loses control and sets *my* house on fire. The next door neighbor is absolutely responsible for losing control of their fire and setting mine on fire. They are criminally liable for all wrongful activity leading up to the out of control fire, and financially liable for repairs to my home plus emotional damages, pain and suffering, what have you.

But they do NOT call the shots in putting out the damn fire. I don't care if the next door neighbor is a fire chief -- he does NOT get to call the shots once he's committed arson. The fire chief from the next town over can be put in charge. The one from the town next door can be assigned to take charge (I want pros, after). But the one who broke the laws can get his ass in front of a judge and start answering questions.

[merkins]

122. You Don't Let The Criminals Run The Operation

-1

[progressoid]

123. Right. Lets give the RW more reasons to declare that govt is incompetent.

After reviewing your post, it seems you must already think that govt is incompetent.

[Jackpine Radical]

128. No, I don't think government is particularly competent at capping deepwater

well blowouts.

[HughMoran]

126. I agree. What we HAVE learned is that drilling this deep was a really bad idea

No technology exists on the planet to deal with such a disaster. If the people who invented the technology can't fix it, why would the US government be able to fix it?

[MindandSoul]

131. I agree with you. . .for the simple reason that BP (and other oil companies) are the ONLY ones

with the technology and the knowledge to deal with this problem. . .
It is not that Obama and his administration are ignoring the problem, it is just that they recognize that it is not the time to be arrogant and pretend that they can fix it without the knowledge and equipment in the Oil industry.

This spill may look like a war against the earth and our environment. . .it may even be a war. . .but there is NO established governmental system that can "fight" that war!

Maybe in the future, such a system needs to be put in place. . .but the fact is that, currently, it doesn't exist!

[ShamelessHussy]

133. they should assist, not be in charge, and they aren't the 'ONLY ones' with the tech and experts

in plugging leaks, sheesh... some folks sound like they have been listening to nothing but BP marketing campaigns all day :eyes:

[MindandSoul]

166. Well, if it was so simple to find the "right" skills to plug this leak at 5000 ft

below sea leve. . .don't you think that leak would already have been plugged. . .by ANYONE???

But, since you are so sure of your statement. . .you may be the one able to resolve this problem. . .

I'm sure you may have some experience plugging a leak in your sprinkler system or something!

[ShamelessHussy]

132. this is a NATIONAL disaster and you want to leave the perps in charge of it? - yikes

this is a disaster of such EPIC proportions that to have any hope of responding effectively it REQUIRES the massive resources that only nation states can bring to bear.

sure BP has a role to play, too, but they definitely shouldn't be the lead, with such authority folks worry that our gov is so weak that they won't even be able to hold BP accountable :shakes-head:

this only goes to show that...

1. we are not prepared for this kind of responsibility (corporations and nations) which is frightening when you consider that there are 3K more wells in operation there.
2. but perhaps even more frightening is how much control corporations have over our nation

:scared:

[BootinUp]

134. Not only that

the Government does not have all the specialized equipment on the ready to deal with it anyways.

Screaming about the problem isn't going to solve it quicker folks.

[ShamelessHussy]

135. the government has the authority to commandeer whatever it needs in an emergency.

if the perps and their accomplices aren't willing to cooperate.

fyi

[earth mom]

136. UNREC!!! I am SICK TO DEATH of the excuses!!!

Sorry, but, The buck stops at Obama's desk:

"We are risking the future of the planet and our species by allowing this deadly ruse to go on."

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/05/22-6

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8395135

[Renew Deal]

150. What can the government do to stop the leak?

Be specific.

And the commondreams article is ridiculous. Besides being written by Obama haters, it blames Obama for something that happened under Bush. It's BS.

[HughMoran]

137. Interesting experiment you've done, albeit unintentionally...

Your more 'doom and gloom' thread has 1 unrec, yet this one that also speaks common sense truth has 33 unrecs :think:

[pitohui]

141. well of course you're correct

i'm still trying to figure out who died and made obama a petroleum engineer

do people truly not understand that BP wants to fix this, they gain NOTHING by having this b.s. continue

[Kablooie]

142. He should have made sure BP is not operating to it's own advantage. That was his responsibility.

I do not believe he did that.
BP has been trying to recover the oil, not stop the flow.
He should also have insured that information released was as accurate as possible and not let BP spin it.

[glitch]

162. +4,000,000/day nt

[darkstar3]

144. Bingo. +1. n/t

[JoeyT]

146. I'd love to disagree with you,

but I really can't.
I honestly don't think anyone knows what the hell to do about this thing.

I would have liked to see the government get involved in mitigation efforts to at least try and hold the spill out of the irreplaceable environments that it's already gotten into and destroyed because the attempts at keeping it out were somewhere between nonexistent and halfassed.

What he will own is the complete lack of accountability that will follow this whole mess. At best BP will have to shell out a quarter's profits, which we'll probably reimburse them for in corporate welfare and tax breaks. I'd like to be less cynical, but given how we've dealt with Wall Street and war criminals, I don't see any real punishment happening.

[GeorgeGist]

147. Obviously that will fix the problem.

Great thinking, Jake.

[Turbineguy]

148. Keep the turd in BP's pocket.

that's where it belongs. Let them find the dry end.

[Renew Deal]

149. I agree with you in general.

BP has the expertise. The government doesn't. Unfortunately there's not much for them to do to stop the leak.

[salguine]

151. I think you would have to be on the board of directors at BP to think that.

[proudohioan]

155. I disagree with you, Jackpine Radical....

On the mere fact of what is at stake here. It's the Gulf Coast, not Wall Street. IMO, it is truly an emergency.

This is not the time to CYA. As much as I hate the thought of we, the taxpayers ending up paying for this mess, it needs to be cleaned up, and quickly. Time is of the essence.

You are right, this IS BP's disaster, but unfortunately, it's at the expense of all of us. Much like a building fire is not the fireman's disaster, but we don't leave it up to the property owner to put out the fire, and to hell with the fire spreading.

Will Obama taking it on get things fixed any faster? I have no idea. However, if there actually is something the government could do, they should be doing so, public whining and poutrage over 'gubmint' intervention. If this is a chess move, it's not the time for games.

[Jackpine Radical]

157. I'm gratified that so many have posted their thoughtful responses on this thread.

This thread served its purpose in getting all of these thoughts aired. I think I would have felt almost frightened if everyone agreed with me.

[proudohioan]

164. And I thank you for your well-phrased OP....

You are reaping what you sow; you sowed a thoughtful, non-judgmental post, phrased in an open, honest and intelligent way.

I appreciated hearing your point of view, as well as not being 'assaulted' for disagreement.

I wish all were as open-minded as you!

:)

[Jackpine Radical]

169. Some of my dearest DU friends, some whom I know personally

and others just from DU &/or email correspondence, have taken strong stances against my position. I think not a whit the less of any of them for it, and indeed thank them. Others have taken my part, also making very useful commentary. I thank them too, as I do you.

I find that my opinion is seldom exactly the same after posting one of these controversial threads. Sometimes my theses become more refined as a result of the discussion, sometimes they are strengthened, sometimes weakened, and sometimes I abandon them altogether. I do know that if I were to write a "Version 2" of the OP, it would be quite different now after all the input here. I love this board when it functions properly and people bring their various perspectives together as has been happening on this thread.

[proudohioan]

172. Yes, exactly.....

This board is great when it functions this way! And unfortunately, those are the days where I sit in front of this damn computer all day long......

I guess the only good thing about those threads that just seem to breed incessant bickering is that it turns me off, therefore, forcing me to turn the PC off and get something productive done (LOL)!

:hi:

[icee]

156. I adamantly disagree with the OP. I am speechless at the thought

of allowing a crooked oil company be in charge of what may be the greatest tragedy ever. What have we become?

[B Calm]

158. I agree with the OP!!!!

[olegramps]

159. The problem is we will be paying for this at the pump.

Gasoline and oil prices should be subject to regulation just as utilities are regulated. They are in reality a monopoly that should be taken out of the commodities markets where they are subject to manipulation by greedy bastards.

[glitch]

161. Agree to disagree (first time in 10 years with Jackpine, it had happen eventually)

:hi:

This isn't a game of political hot potato, lives are being lost.

[Jackpine Radical]

170. Hey, thanks--not just for the endorsement, but for the "hot potato" metaphor.

You started me thnking--it's not so much a "hot potato" thing as it is tossing a hand grenade back & forth. My whole position is based on the notion that there is nothing the government or anybody else can do to stop this thing quickly. The one holding the hand grenade when it goes off loses. Nobody can keep it from going off. All you can do is not be holding it when it blows. That, I think, is why Obama wants to keep it in BP hands. And when it blows, he wants to say "We cooperated with them in every way they asked."

Yes, lives are being lost, yes it is a great tragedy. I would do anything to stop it. But I believe that neither I nor anyone else can do that.

[Feron]

165. I look at it this way.

BP knows the geology and quirks of that particular well. And they also already have the know how. One would think that outside experts would be consulted if necessary, but that isn't a guarantee even with the gov't totally in charge.

It's silly to dump them entirely and start completely over. It also wastes valuable time. And while I would like the well closed yesterday, I also realize that these types of accidents can take a long time to cap.

My complaint largely comes from the gov't's complete lack of urgency in mitigation efforts. And the fact that they are working in tandem with BP rather than being an independent entity in command.

Otherwise I agree with you.

[patrice]

167. Leaving BP in charge also makes it possible to find out things we need to know, things that would

go deep underground if the government took this situation over, all sorts of things, not only directly relevant to the actors and the situation, but all sorts of contextual elements too.

If the government were the primary factor, it would all be more about the government, instead of about who corporations are and whether they act for the best or not.

[inna]

168. Too late to unrec. Reading this thread was a pretty shocking experience.

[Scurrilous]

173. Kick

:kick: