Gulf Oil Rig Disaster

Neal

Lifetime Supporter
It today Thursday? WTF. $160k a year and that's the best you can do. Lions, tigers, monkeys and bears on bicycles. F-in circus.

resizetofit


Back to the real topic. Methane accumulation and methane/oil seepage has been observed. There appears to be some evidence of fissure or leakage around the perimeter of the well. This is going to get much worse before it gets better... FOOBAR!
 
Al, Al, Al,
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
P><P><FONT face=
What a short memory you have. I’m surprised that good, righteous, ‘Muricans like you have forgoten the golden rule repeated early and often during the glorious 8 years of Idiot Son’s ‘Mission Accomplished” administration. One may never criticize a sitting president during a time of war. Matter of fact from what we were told time and time again, not only would we be helping the terrorist by criticizing the president, it could be considered treason. Why do you hate ‘Murica Al?



IMSA07

I happen to love America and I take offence to your condescension, but that is a liberal trait, isn't it!
 
I'm so confused.

So

Why don't the republicans just save themselves some time and money by going on the air and saying to the American people

"We know damn well that those of you who continue to support us are astonishing morons of the nth degree. .


IMSA07

Ahhh couldn’t have said it better myself,,,,

BUT, WAIT A MINUTE, ,,,,,,what about JOE BARTON????

Texas does produce GIANT SIZE Morons ,,,but THIS ONE,,,,,,,should be sent to Louisiana for a "Deliverance STYLE" attention.
 
Terry, all we have to do is look at the results, as Al says.

The polls say that 50% of the people think Bush did a good job with Katrina, and 35% think that BHO is doing a good job with the oil spill.

When the Netherlands offers equipment to stop the slick from coming ashore (days after the slick started) and it is rejected, then we have a problem.
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
If this stupid arsed obama continues his dumb, simple rhetoric,
the time for the ' grassy knoll ' may not be long off.
After all, we have many ex servicemen, involved in Iraq & Afghan suffering from ptsd !
Lets see if the NSA software picks up on that.
NSA, welcome to tea and cucumber sandwiches 24/7.<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

Andy, what an a** hole
 
From someone smarter than me:

Published in the New York Post on June 15, 2010

The Gulf oil spill that's so bedeviling President Obama has its roots back in the Clinton years.

In 1995, President Bill Clinton signed the Outer Continental Shelf Deepwater Royalty Relief Act, which exempted oil wells drilled deep in the Gulf from the normal royalty payments to the government.

Usually, these payments amount to between 12 percent and 16 percent of their revenues, so the exemption did a great deal to catalyze drilling in deep waters in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Deepwater Horizon well, where drilling began in 2001, was one of those catalyzed by the Clinton legislation. Overall, deepwater oil production in the Gulf shot up from 42 million barrels in 1996 to 348 million in 2004.

The latter figure represents about 6 percent of total US oil consumption and about 15 percent of domestic production. Natural-gas production from deepwater Gulf drilling increased tenfold during the same period.

The legislation was pushed avidly by Republicans in Congress, particularly those representing the very Gulf states now engulfed by the BP spill.

Unfortunately, the Clinton administration -- and the Bush and Obama administrations that followed -- failed to consider seriously what to do if things went wrong.

In contrast to the licensing of nuclear power plants, which we require to spend vast amounts of time and money to develop failsafe systems, very little thought was given (obviously) to how to stop an explosion that would trigger a vast spill, how to plug the hole or how to stop the oil from reaching Gulf and Atlantic coast beaches. Instead, the industry took its cue from Washington and went full speed ahead into drilling and production in deepwater wells.

This decision to embark on vast Gulf oil drilling was, of course, the correct one. But the failure to think through how to avert a disaster like what's now on our hands is the height of irresponsibility.

All three administrations -- Clinton, Bush, and Obama -- bear the blame for this abject failure. None took the danger of a massive spill seriously or sought to hold up the massive expansion of offshore drilling until failsafe measures could be developed.

Ironically, the crisis that arguably put Obama in the White House was also rooted in the Clinton era: The road to the mortgage meltdown begins with the '90s drive to greatly loosen mortgage-lending standards in the pursuit of increasing homeownership.

As we suffer now for past failures of foresight and planning, perhaps it's time to start taking closer looks at what Washington's doing now that may lead to future disasters.



I find it interesting that BO has issued a moratorium on drilling while 12 different countries continue to drill in the gulf. Maybe there wouldn't have been such a disater if the EPA had not pushed the rigs so far out, or rather not allowed them to drill in shallower waters where a disaster could be handled better.

Bill
 
From someone smarter than me:

Published in the New York Post on June 15, 2010

The Gulf oil spill that's so bedeviling President Obama has its roots back in the Clinton years.

In 1995, President Bill Clinton signed the Outer Continental Shelf Deepwater Royalty Relief Act, which exempted oil wells drilled deep in the Gulf from the normal royalty payments to the government.

Usually, these payments amount to between 12 percent and 16 percent of their revenues, so the exemption did a great deal to catalyze drilling in deep waters in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Deepwater Horizon well, where drilling began in 2001, was one of those catalyzed by the Clinton legislation. Overall, deepwater oil production in the Gulf shot up from 42 million barrels in 1996 to 348 million in 2004.

The latter figure represents about 6 percent of total US oil consumption and about 15 percent of domestic production. Natural-gas production from deepwater Gulf drilling increased tenfold during the same period.

The legislation was pushed avidly by Republicans in Congress, particularly those representing the very Gulf states now engulfed by the BP spill.

Unfortunately, the Clinton administration -- and the Bush and Obama administrations that followed -- failed to consider seriously what to do if things went wrong.

In contrast to the licensing of nuclear power plants, which we require to spend vast amounts of time and money to develop failsafe systems, very little thought was given (obviously) to how to stop an explosion that would trigger a vast spill, how to plug the hole or how to stop the oil from reaching Gulf and Atlantic coast beaches. Instead, the industry took its cue from Washington and went full speed ahead into drilling and production in deepwater wells.

This decision to embark on vast Gulf oil drilling was, of course, the correct one. But the failure to think through how to avert a disaster like what's now on our hands is the height of irresponsibility.

All three administrations -- Clinton, Bush, and Obama -- bear the blame for this abject failure. None took the danger of a massive spill seriously or sought to hold up the massive expansion of offshore drilling until failsafe measures could be developed.

Ironically, the crisis that arguably put Obama in the White House was also rooted in the Clinton era: The road to the mortgage meltdown begins with the '90s drive to greatly loosen mortgage-lending standards in the pursuit of increasing homeownership.

As we suffer now for past failures of foresight and planning, perhaps it's time to start taking closer looks at what Washington's doing now that may lead to future disasters.



I find it interesting that BO has issued a moratorium on drilling while 12 different countries continue to drill in the gulf. Maybe there wouldn't have been such a disater if the EPA had not pushed the rigs so far out, or rather not allowed them to drill in shallower waters where a disaster could be handled better.

Bill


Isn't the NY Post a Rupert Murdock owned newspaper? Enough said.

IMSA07
 
+1 Bill! You are correct , but you need to include Congress in the equation.

Terry,
you seem to see an elephant behind every tree. You have failed to see the jackasses.
Garry
 
"BP removed Chief Executive Tony Hayward from day-to-day oversight of the Gulf oil spill crisis a day after he was pummeled by lawmakers in an appearance on Capitol Hill, the company's chairman said Friday." AP

BP might as well sent a zombie to Washington (or did they?).

Chris
 
Terry,
There is a saying something to the effect, keep yor friends close and your enemy's closer. What I think it means is, if you want to know what is going wrong in your camp, you should listen to the opposition and figure out is it just regurgitation of talking points or is it factual.
Your problem is you find fault with where it comes from and not what it says. If what it says isn't factual or correct then lets hear it. Otherwise you are just blowing smoke and trying to change the subject, or throw out insults. This is a common trait of those that can't deal with the facts, or don't have any rebuttal to the facts. They deal in emotionalism.
I think if you read "it", there is none of that present. Just the facts mam. Nothing but the facts.

Bill
 
"BP removed Chief Executive Tony Hayward from day-to-day oversight of the Gulf oil spill crisis a day after he was pummeled by lawmakers in an appearance on Capitol Hill, the company's chairman said Friday." AP

BP might as well sent a zombie to Washington (or did they?).

Chris

I imagine BP lawyers told Tony Hayward to do and say exactly what he did, nothing. There are bound to be huge lawsuits in the making, agreeing to fault in front of God and everybody on national tv would be monetary suicide for BP. The congress's only purpose was to bloat up like toads with righteous indignation for the benefit of their constituents. What did they expect of BP "yeah we're dangerous loose cannons, sue us".
 
For those that don't know, Dick Morris was an advisor for President Clinton


By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on June 16, 2010



To the left, the oil spill is not an index of presidential competence or an issue in the political sphere. It is a daily gushing of poison into the Earth's waters as a direct result of the president's failure to stop it. They blame BP. But they already hate oil companies. And they blame Obama, too. And they are coming to dislike him.

When Obama attempts to recoup this damage to his political base by pushing new legislation on the environment or by resurrecting his cap and trade legislation or by bringing criminal charges against BP or by setting up a liability fund for the spill's victims, it does not solve his political problem. With each day, 60,000 gallons gush into the Gulf, Obama's equivalent of the body count in Iraq that caused the left to loathe George W. Bush. Rhetoric or programs or visits to the Gulf or posturing won't assuage the negatives. Only plugging the hole in the bottom of the ocean can do it.

The right and center of American politics turned off Obama over health care. And now the left is leaving him over the oil spill.

Why can't Obama plug the hole?

Because he has no administrative experience. I often saw Bill Clinton, as governor and as president, call in experts and ask the tough questions when he faced a new disaster. In Arkansas, it was tornadoes or floods or fires. In Washington, it was Oklahoma City. But, each time, he thoroughly familiarized himself with all the technical issues. He took a bath in the science and substance of the hazard and became as knowledgeable as those who had spent a lifetime studying it. So he knew what questions to ask.

Any CEO or COO or manager has similar experience. But a community organizer, law professor, state senator, US Senator, and president doesn't have the requisite experience. He doesn't know not to trust his own bureaucracy. He hasn't been burned enough to realize that he needs to intervene to waive restrictions, set aside regulations, and open up the process to new solutions. He's like JFK during the Bay of Pigs. He doesn't know how to avoid being betrayed by his own bureaucracy and the industry it's supposed to regulate.

Why did he not waive the Jones Act (he still hasn't) to allow foreign vessels to ply our waters to clean up the spill? Not because he was against it. He couldn't have been against so obvious a course as waiving it. It was likely because nobody told him about it and he never knew to ask.

Why did he let the bureaucracy use only US contractors to dredge the Gulf and build the berms that Louisiana wanted? Why did he spurn the offer of Dutch assistance (half the country has been dredged from the sea and is below sea level)? Not because he wanted the jobs to go to Americans. That would have been an insane consideration in the face of this crisis. it is probably because he never realized that our capacity for dredging needed augmentation. Because he never asked.

To the right and the center, these failings show that Obama is in over his head. But to the left, which bleeds for each drop of water in the Gulf and cries over every turtle or shrimp or sea bird, it is an unpardonable sin.

It is the nature of things that presidential mistakes metastasize into presidential character flaws. Bush's inaction over Katrina comes across as insensitivity. Now Obama's incompetence and inexperience is causing liberals to see him as arrogant, aloof, removed, conceited, suspicious of outside advice, and even lazy. Long after the oil has stopped spilling, these supposed character defects will haunt the president, just as Carter's reputation of timidity and inability lasted long after the Iran hostages came home. These defects will last until 2012 and beyond.
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
Dick Morris is a right wing schlep who "switched sides" after getting busted with a hooker in DC as a means of reviving his career. One of the worst hacks/schills/know-nothings parading around as pandering "news" on TV.
 
Jeff, I have read both sides, and actually think Dick Morris is more in tune than for example Chris Matthews. Why is Dick's opinion distorted?
 
As I posted on another thread, if you have facts to dispute a post, then post them. If you don't then you are dealing in demagogery.It is a fasination with those of Jeff's persuasion to ignore the facts, change the subject or to hurl insults when they can't deal with the facts. He may not like Dick's information, but it is factual, and I think Dick's background is worth more listening to than someones opinion that has no basis in fact.
Yes Dick Morris has changed ideals, but he backs it up with fact unlike some of our senators who do it for political expedience. He has nothing to gain from this. He just puts forth information that is for the reader to decide if it is credible or useful!!!

Bill
 
Back
Top