I've taken nearly a month off from writing about or commenting on the current state of affairs we, as Americans, find ourselves in.
I've always said that those who vehemently oppose our duly elected President, his appointments, and his policies should do just as Democrats did a couple of years ago and find a candidate palatable to the majority of American people and vote him or her into office.
But the opposition has chosen another path in their attempt to get back into the White House. The path of obstruction aimed at weakening and undermining our President. A path that has bought out the many lunatics we've witnessed over the last 17 months.
I'd like to begin by discussing the U.S. judge who ruled against White House on drilling ban. Common sense tells me that until the leak is capped and we fully understand what really caused the worse environmental disaster in American history, any further drilling should be banned.
I side with Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Edward Markey, who chairs a House energy independence committee, who called the ruling "another bad decision in a disaster riddled with bad decisions by the oil industry."
“This is another bad decision in a disaster riddled with bad decisions by the oil industry,” Mr. Markey said. “The only thing worse than one oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico would be two oil spill disasters. This judge’s decision flies in the face of mounting evidence that there are serious safety risks that must be examined with these 33 deep-water rigs before they start drilling again.”
I believe that putting profits over people and our environment is the wrong path to take. I believe the threats of oil rigs leaving the Gulf never to return are all hogwash. I believe that six months is a reasonable amount of time to study off shore drilling and make sure a disaster like this never happens again. What is so terribly wrong with that? Did the judge conveniently forget that 11 lives were lost? Has the judge taken time to come down from his ivory tower to see the oil laced turtles, pelicans, flora, and fauna?
I urge the President to impose another 6 month ban with even stronger wording. It's the right thing to do.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now onto General McChrystal. Fire him immediately. Rip the stars from his shoulders the moment he walks through the doors of the White House. Mr. McChrystal's interview with Rolling Stone magazine sounds more like the words of a drunken sailor than that of someone with the responsibility of a military General.
His apparent contempt for the Obama White House, as detailed in a Rolling Stone profile, disrespects the chain of command, shreds his credibility and undermines the war effort. The story made plain that McChrystal's error in judgment was not merely allowing a reporter access to a culture in which he and his leadership team mocked and belittled the Obama administration. His cardinal offense was allowing that culture of cynicism to evolve around him.
If anything, McChrystal had reason to be deeply loyal to Obama, considering that the president overrode the doubts of some of his most trusted advisers - including Vice President Joe Biden - in substantially filling the general's request for tens of thousands of additional troops.
Can you imagine General Colin Powell acting in such a manner? I urge the President to fire him NOW! Don't even give him the luxury of submitting his resignation.
What is your opinion? Do you think the Judge's decision to overturn the ban was the correct decision? Should McChrystal be fired or just taken to the woodshed for a good whipping?
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 158
As for general McChrystal this has occurred to me. No general wants to go down in history as loosing a war. Perhaps his general has realized that this war cannot be won. So he participating in an article that gets him fired and rides off happily into the sunset leaving the mess to someone else
As for McChrystal, he should have stepped down if you disagreed with the President's policies. Now he goes down in history as a buffoon.
He could have rode off into the sunset without sounding like a drunken sailor.
He did what he had to do for U.S.A., Inc.
McCrystal has to go and it would be nice if he could be publically fired.
This is his second time to display disloyalty and disrespect to his Commander in Chief.
Obviously, no brains. McCrystal, You don't diss the boss even if you are a tomato picker.
I think he has a "McArthur" complex.
Truman was under attack by the McCarthy Gang and the Birchers to be, when he fired McArthur.
The last thing on earth anyone wants to see is another spill of this magnitude. The 30,000 people you mention pales in comparison to hundreds of thousand potential jobs that will be lost if tar balls begin surfacing along Florida's over 800 miles of pristine beaches.
Nora look at the overall picture. Let's get this thing right before we continue business as usual.
Are you predicting that there will be no more blow outs?
Not to mention that pipeline explosion, the one that just happened in Texas.
We know you and other conservatives care nothing for the environment, you want to live in a dirty, killing environment, actually, nothing can live in what the oil companies would consider ideal drilling conditions. You care nothing about their workers, nothing about the planet that sustains us.
P. S. you have nothing to back up the employment number you post.
What do you think caused the most damage, the spill or a order to stop new deep drilling for 6 months?
Are you advocating for another blow-out to join this one.
S i c k e n i n g!
The ban was on new deep well drilling.
But sure tell the lies you are told, that is your job. Repeat the lies.
Very interesting point. And if it's true, then it makes the general's disloyalty treasonous! tame
And McChrystal? We saw how Obama disrespected him from the beginning. I'm not surprised that the feeling is mutual.
And for you to say that the ban will put 300,000 people out of work is a blatant lie. Where do you get your information from? And who do you believe believes it?
Marilyn I'm not in the mood for lies, distortions, or anything of that nature. We've had enough of that over the last 17 months.
AND YOU, A RANK AMATEUR OIL GEOLOGIST HAVE THE AUDACITY TO SAY THE SUSPENSION OF ALL DRILLING TILL THE PROBLEM IS WORKED OUT IS A BAD THING.
Marilyn GO SIT IN A CORNER AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID AND WHAT GAVE YOU THE CHUTZPAH TO SAY IT.
burbling as it comes!!!
I am only warning you this once my beamish friend.
Marilyn is so dishonest, I wonder how she can continue to show up on gather.com
That's a lie.
Marilyn, I haven't read the article so can't really comment on it; but I do agree with what you say here.
And I have a question that somewhat coincides with that. Has Obama actually read the article? Or is he, again, only going on what he has "heard?"
What I mean is, Obama pronounced judgement in the Gates case before he knew all the facts and practically directed his justice department to sue Arizona before he'd even read the Arizona law ...
Sooo, if Obama has not yet read the article, and if I was McChrystal, I'd be on watch in all directions for how the president will respond; but I'd be especially on the lookout for lawyers carrying sixpacks.
Char it only takes 1 problem to destroy a pristine ecosystem for decades.
Ask the people of Alaska about their one problem with the Exxon Valdez.
Ask the people of Chernobyl about their one problem with the nuclear meltdown.
We should not be playing Russian roulette with our environment.
We just need to make sure we get it right when it comes to offshore drilling.
What's so wrong with that?
Yes... tame
It's also not a lie that OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION LIED about the experts they consulted saying that the moratorium was what they suggested. It was not, and when the experts all came out and said so, Obama and crew changed their report. Where have you been?
It's also not a lie that OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION LIED about the experts they consulted saying that the moratorium was what they suggested. It was not, and when the experts all came out and said so, Obama and crew changed their report.
All true ...
Marilyn M. Jun 24, 2010, 2:19am EDT
Lloyd, there are no lies in what I said. The report - from Louisiana - is that 300,000 people will be put out of work if deep water drilling stops. Other states will have more and from what I've heard it could be close to a million people. It doesn't just put people out of work who are on the rigs, but people in refineries and all kinds of other jobs. Common sense tells you that's so, Lloyd. Have you ever been around the areas where there is drilling and oil? I have.
It's also not a lie that OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION LIED about the experts they consulted saying that the moratorium was what they suggested. It was not, and when the experts all came out and said so, Obama and crew changed their report. Where have you been?
30,000, 300,000, and now a million. What is it? Why such a huge disparity?
Stop being hysterical and give the oil companies 6 months to investigate this environmental disaster and find solutions to make sure it never happens again.
Use a little common sense. Why continue more deep sea off shore drilling when we still don't know what caused this explosion, deaths, and environmental disaster?
Look at the whole picture.
Smart money these days is on SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLE RESOURCES.
Lee, if you wanna make a LOT of money, get with a good solar or wind power company, get a dozen friends together, get trained, properly, to install and sell the systems, and get your butt out there working.
They find every excuse in the book as to why alternative sources of energy cannot work. They could care less about monumental environmental disasters like the leak in the Gulf.
It's "Drill Baby Drill" as far as they are concerned.
Shame on them.
As of the time that the judge decided against Obama on this one, there were already 11,000 jobs lost in Louisiana. From what I read today, that number has now increased to 5 times that.
Marilyn what else would you expect this "guy" to say?
I believe more jobs will be lost if the leak is not capped and the livlihoods of hundreds of thousands of people in the Gulf region are affected by BP's incompentency.
Why do you side with BP and never with those who are trying to find solutions and those who are already affected by the worse environmental disaster in American history?
As usual, you and those who oppose the President are on the wrong side of this issue.
Liberals went to Louisiana to demonstrate against BP. Solutions? Why didn't they help with the clean up instead of demonstrating?
Obama completely ignored the "experts" he asked to help in the Gulf, then he lied about the fact that they said there should be a moratorium. They never said that.
Obama refused to let other countries help.
Obama - no matter what he now claims - pretty much ignored this problem for a month while he went to concerts and played golf.
And you wonder why I oppose this president?
He's just using this to take over another aspect of our lives, Lloyd. When will you wake up?
... or close down all bars? Close all the automobile factories? Or make it a crime for anyone to have a baby until we figure out what causes some of them to go haywire in regard alcohol? . . .
As analogies go, Nora's was a pretty good one. As an example, but for scale, it's actually spot on. If a knife cuts off a finger, should we ban all knives. An airplane crashes on a children's hospital... should all airports be closed? Etc like that.
tamerlane f. Jun 23, 2010, 1:33pm EDT
This pathetic analogy is an insult to intelligence! tame
Now, when peoples' lives and the environment are in danger, they belly-ache about a few jobs. Put those men to work cleaning up BP's mess, then they won't lose their salaries. Put them to work on alternative fuel projects. There's millions to be made in that field. Sure, they'll have to learn new skills and maybe even move, but isn't that better than dying on the job in another accident?
As far as McChrystal goes, no one should be allowed to publically bad-mouth the president, let alone a man in his position. If he can't say it to Obama's face, he shows himself to be a passive-aggressive coward, unfit for the job.
That is why they apologize to BP while doing nothing to be part of the solution. Yes they cry about their children receiving health care but are satisfied with those same children eating tainted food, swimming in tainted waters, and never, ever being able to see the fauna and flora that once existed.
They are HYPOCRITES!
As far as McChrystal goes, he should be fired immediately and go down in history as a traitor and coward.
Once again, If anything, McChrystal had reason to be deeply loyal to Obama, considering that the president overrode the doubts of some of his most trusted advisers - including Vice President Joe Biden - in substantially filling the general's request for tens of thousands of additional troops.
He's an ungrateful, stupid man who needs to be fired. His lack of judgment disqualifies him from any significant leadership role in the United States military.
Now this is dissent that's respectful! tame
McChrystal fostered an atmosphere of disrespect to the extent of ridicule of this superiors, including especially the President, Vice President and Sec'y of Defense... IN PUBLIC!!!. He allowed them to give it public utterance in his presence, and he himself behaved like a likkered-up schoolboy in with the reporter there.
All of that DOES, in fact, amount to a breach of Military Courtesy that might, under the USMJ, be construed as mutiny. In any case, he WOULD be subject to Courts Martial for any number of offenses that wouldn't get an enlisted man in much trouble at all.
I dont' agree with the capitals and the exclamation ... but I do agree this is apparently what he did. He's a soldier, this is what he's been thinking, and apparently what a lot of people over there have been thinking; it's just not wise to say it in public. So yes ... he had to go.
Breach of etiquette? Yes. Disrespect? Yes. Likkered-up school boy? Not so much. Might be construed as mutiny if the ones construing it were a little nutty.
Hey, have you told Obama that he's in charge of an illegal war? Just wondering.
Why do I get the feeling that you would be first in line accusing the President of cutting and running?
It's easy to Monday morning quarterback, but finding real solutions to the many issues facing our nation is very complex.
And finally did President Obama start these 2 wars? I was of the opinion that they were started under former President George Bush.
I was always so amazed during the Bush administration of the steadfast silence of dissenters who stoically bore the pains they endured, almost as if in prayer, as their own candidate stealthily rose, like a beacon in the darkness appearing from the shadows of the holies to bring them to their glorious victory. It's a hidden lesson of history, indeed, that I am so glad you are able to teach us, Lloyd.
And note that Lloyd said "... over the past 17 months." Inaccurate, of course... more like "... from the day his nomination became inevitable." This vilification started the day he became the likely Democrat candidate, and has been mounting in shrillness and intensity ever since. Despite his obvious shortcomings, we didn't really get started on Bush until he abandoned the effort in Afghanistan and headed for Iraq.
Don't tell me when it started or how different it was because I know better. I was the one listening, remember. Bush's "obvious shortcomings" were never obvious enough to people who wanted to make sure they weren't missed.
Marilyn and I don't agree on everything, but I have a lot of respect for her because I can read what she writes and not have to scratch my head wondering how she could contradict herself at every turn. I cannot say the same for you. If she ever did contradict herself, I could point out to Marilyn why I thought so, and she would have a legitimate and reasonable answer. Whether I agreed with her explanation or not, at least I would see rationality evidenced. I cannot say the same for you. You twist everything and anything that doesn't agree with your narrow, conceptual vision. I have no respect for anything you say, though sometimes, on very rare occasions, you do have something valid to say, but I can't express credit to you because you might twist that into something it isn't either.
Sue we all sat back and watched as Bush quickly turned Clinton's surplus into a deficit.
We all sat back and watched as Bush snatched victory from defeat when he took his eye off the prize in Afghanistan and began focusing on a weakened Saddam Hussein. All the time telling lies about weapons of mass destruction and causing the deaths of over 4000 American men and women.
We all sat back and watched as our basic liberties were slowly dismantled with the Patriot Act. We only spoke out when we decided ENOUGH was ENOUGH.
However the venom towards Barack Obama started before he ever set foot in the White House.
"Just Say No", "I Hope He Fails", and "Kill The Bill" , are hallmarks of the lunacy perpetrated by those whom opposed the President from day one.
So I'm glad that I have taught you a lesson. One that will sink in as you and those who hysterically opposed our duly elected 44th President will realize as you remain the minority party in the Congress, the Senate, the Governorships, and the White House after the November mid-term elections.
By the way, that's most of the things that I am still against.
I personally received my largest tax return in nearly a decade. But Nora will conveniently ignore that FACT.
And did your concern for "our great-grandchildren" begin 17 months ago or were you as concerned when former President George Bush quickly turned the Clinton surplus into a deficit?
Wouldn't "our great-grandchildren" have to also pay for George Bush's spending?
Over spending does not help families, businesses or governments, Lloyd. History proves that again and again.
Socialism doesn't work. History has proved that as well.
Have you forgotten the left's behavior when Bush was in office?
Look, Obama's approval rating didn't go from 70% to 41% because of "lunatics" or any other "obstruction" formally known as debate and democracy when democrats engaged in it. His approval is down because he promised to change Washington, to end deficit spending, earmarks, backroom deals, special kickbacks for votes, partisanship, etc... His approval is down for failing to deliver on promises and for things going from bad to worse in his first 1 1/2 years in office. Blaming Bush worked for the first year. Failing miserably on his promises is what is sinking his ship not obstruction.
Gen McChrystal, didn't go over the top in his criticism and it doesn't seem like he ever intended for his personal opinion to go public but it was wrong. He's apologized for it and you can't blame the president of he terminates the general's command.
As far as the oil spill, a judge found Obama's executive moratorium to be unconstitutional. There are other ways to get from point A to point B and the president will have to work with congress and do it right. Some think that you shouldn't let a disaster "go to waste" but the constitution should not be ignored regardless of emotions and opinions.
The Gulf Disaster should be being called Cheney's Katrina, He made it all possible. Remember those secret meetings with big oil immediately after the 2004 election/2005 inauguration. OOh, sorry I forgot, Republicans, conservatives, can't remember further back than today's talking points.
H. R. 6 from the 109th congress, signed by Dubya Aug. 8, at Sandia Labs in New Mexico.
H. R. 6 is only U.S. Law.
Here is the link
http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:11:./temp/~mdbsesKUMo::
""Oh, sorry I forgot, Republicans, conservatives, can't remember further back than today's talking points. ""
You accuse me of having nothing but talking points but that's all you have offered in this thread. What you have said is what I expect from Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi. It isn't what I would expect to hear from somebody claiming to be above talking points. You seriously need to stop assuming what your high priest and priestess say is true and start doing a little research. Especially if you accuse others of being as ignorant and intellectually bankrupt as yourself.
I ask you again to point out any deregulation under Bush. This isn't a difficult question unless of course it is true that all you democrats, liberals "can't remember further back than today's talking points".
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Lloyd, I completely understand your need to get away from this insanity for awhile. I have a lot of days when I'm ready to join you. But it's great to have you back with us, Friend, and to see you posting again. Hang in there. :) xoxo
Sandy, not sure you'd really want to go there ... 'cause I wonder how much "stock" ... how much of a financial interest in "green" companies Obama has? Joe? Al? Valerie? Name any Congressman on either side of the aisle? .... Just exactly how much of what Glenn Beck has reported (and what almost anyone can find for him/herself online) about Complex Carbon Trading .... Chicago Climate Exchange can be verified?
Seems to me even if only half... even if only a quarter ... if only an eighth of it was true and the rest speculation or even misinformation ... seems to me associations with the oil companies and associations with green investments of one kind and another could be compared as 6 of one and half dozen of the other. Two faces of the same greed.
Sandy B. Jun 23, 2010, 2:07am EDT
That "wise" Judge Feldman who lifted the moratorium just happens to own stock in NUMEROUS oil and energy companies including Haliburton and Transocean. Sound familiar? (If you don't recognize the names of those corporations and understand why they are so important to this discussion then you shouldn't be addressing this topic. ) There are too many oil and energy companies to count on Feldman's financial disclosure. Have a look HERE So, the great majority of political commentators aren't really surprised at his ruling. I don't know how many more examples of Right Wing/ Corporate ties people need to figure out what drives the GOP. It certainly isn't concern for the people they represent.
Lloyd, I completely understand your need to get away from this insanity for awhile. I have a lot of days when I'm ready to join you. But it's great to have you back with us, Friend, and to see you posting again. Hang in there. :) xoxo
Associations matter now? . . . I guess we were correct all along about the "shout out" Obama's been giving us in regard to who he is from virtually his first day as Candidate Obama (and before). Here's an excerpt from that "shout out" article:
". . . it is interesting even though horrifying at the same time how the SDS, Weather Underground (Bill Ayers and others including Valerie Jarrett and Jeff Jones), tax cheats, convicts, Black Nationalism, Mao admirers, Che lovers, and Marxism keep finding their way into the background and ideologies of so many of Obama's past and current associates.
I think the people he chooses and allows to be chosen for him to associate with (employ and endorse), past AND present is a virtual "shout out" from Obama himself describing his own worldview and beliefs. Actions speak louder than words, and Obama's active and passive choices in this area are starting to drown out any of his spoken words of denial..."
Soooo, I don't know how many more examples of his active and passive choices and ties in this area people need to figure out what drives the President ...
I was taught birds of a feather flock together. I'm okay with the birds I've been flocking with ... but are you (the general 'you') okay with the ones Obama has been, and still is, flocking with?
If so, great ... your decision.
But if not, wouldn't you agree with another quote from the above article ... "If these are not his beliefs, maybe it's time even at this late date in his life, to start choosing better people with which to associate himself. Mmm?"
My comment about the GOP corporate ties has to do with them legislating and governing to please the corporations who line their pockets. I don't care who they talk to or have to dinner unless I start to see evidence that those affiliations are hurting the American public. Barton licks BP's boots and now this judge feels a need to take this very drastic measure against the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. As an American citizen, I don't take kindly to someone undermining my President when he has something to personally gain from doing so. He should have recused himself. We're talking about a judge making a decision that will result in him making more money. Forget politics - tell me how that is fair? If you say you don't understand what's wrong with this picture, then you're kidding yourself and you're lying to me. Not trying to be impolite - just not sure how else to put it. As for the GOP in general, I don't care if they invest in the man in the moon, or if the man in the moon contributes to their campaign. My problem is when they make decisions that benefit the man in the moon instead of their constituents. Period.
Now back to that evil Obama... I apply the same standard to him. Until I see him making choices that benefit any of those people or causes you mentioned while being detrimental to the American public, I don't have a problem with it. I can't even believe that tired Bill Ayers garbage is still being talked about. Do you think Obama was born in Kenya, too? That the entire state of Hawaii and everyone who ever met Obama, his mother, his father, and his grandparents, his teachers, the DMV, etc. is part of this vast conspiracy to hide the place of Obama's birth? Just asking...
Lee, what it boils down to is that I like the direction Obama is taking the country - not his every decision, but the direction in general. He is an intelligent man and a man of character, a father and a husband. And he's my elected-by-a-landslide President. I respect him and support him and pray for him because the more we will build him up the more he can rebuild this nation. Nothing you just mentioned about Obama is news. It's just guilt by association as part of a very ugly smear campaign. I'm a Christian so let me leave you with a few biblical references. Jesus Christ himself was criticized for hanging out with the wrong kind of people. I like to make my judgments about people not based on outward appearances, but based on the words of Jesus. In Mark 7:16 he said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits."
- Center for Responsive Politics: "The $71,051 that Obama received during the 2008 election cycle was entirely from BP employees" and constituted under 0.01% of his total contributions
Thanks Sandy. My previous article regarding Israels flotilla raid left me drained. I just needed to take some time off. But I'm back. And thank you for your quality replies to this post.
You are definitely a strong voice of reason.
Too late, too tired, and going out of town ... will try to respond when I get back.
Sandy B. Jun 23, 2010, 5:46pm EDT
Lee, I knew this kind of response would crop up. First of all, let's assume you're right - Obama is a commie pinko liberal muslim marxist black nationalist socialist. (Did I get them all in?) Because if Glen Beck or the National Enquirer say it, it must be true. Back to this in a moment...
My comment about the GOP corporate ties has to do with them legislating and governing to please the corporations who line their pockets. I don't care who they talk to or have to dinner unless I start to see evidence that those affiliations are hurting the American public. Barton licks BP's boots and now this judge feels a need to take this very drastic measure against the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. As an American citizen, I don't take kindly to someone undermining my President when he has something to personally gain from doing so. He should have recused himself. We're talking about a judge making a decision that will result in him making more money. Forget politics - tell me how that is fair? If you say you don't understand what's wrong with this picture, then you're kidding yourself and you're lying to me. Not trying to be impolite - just not sure how else to put it. As for the GOP in general, I don't care if they invest in the man in the moon, or if the man in the moon contributes to their campaign. My problem is when they make decisions that benefit the man in the moon instead of their constituents. Period.
Now back to that evil Obama... I apply the same standard to him. Until I see him making choices that benefit any of those people or causes you mentioned while being detrimental to the American public, I don't have a problem with it. I can't even believe that tired Bill Ayers garbage is still being talked about. Do you think Obama was born in Kenya, too? That the entire state of Hawaii and everyone who ever met Obama, his mother, his father, and his grandparents, his teachers, the DMV, etc. is part of this vast conspiracy to hide the place of Obama's birth? Just asking...
Lee, what it boils down to is that I like the direction Obama is taking the country - not his every decision, but the direction in general. He is an intelligent man and a man of character, a father and a husband. And he's my elected-by-a-landslide President. I respect him and support him and pray for him because the more we will build him up the more he can rebuild this nation. Nothing you just mentioned about Obama is news. It's just guilt by association as part of a very ugly smear campaign. I'm a Christian so let me leave you with a few biblical references. Jesus Christ himself was criticized for hanging out with the wrong kind of people. I like to make my judgments about people not based on outward appearances, but based on the words of Jesus. In Mark 7:16 he said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits."
Lee I wouldn't expect anything less from our Government. That is part of the problem. What is it that we know that the rest of the world doesn't?
Why can't we take a friend to task when a friend does something wrong?
And one last note about the moratorium - it affects only 1/100th of a percent of offshore oil rigs. I think we can handle that for a few months.
Knee jerk reactions to negative opinions are stupid. Are you supporting another stupid act for the president? He already has too many idiots telling him what to do... Common sense should prevail, and common sense says that until they have a concerted group to replace McCrystal and his bunch that got smeared by the far left Rolling Stone rag, the ego firing should be postponed!
It wasn't a smear at all. Smearing is what was done to Al Gore by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. What they did to him was a disgrace.
Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
So far as McChrystal is concerned... no resignation... no firing. Battle cry from the '60s and early '70s covers this asshat... "Up against th' WALL, M-F!!!"
Before they do anymore drilling in deep water they need a way to stop a blowout. They don't know what they're doing yet.
(my two cents)
Until we have a full investigaton, we won't know. But my guess is that some of the ones who made a "bad choice" are among the dead. We may never know the exact sequence of events.
Double blow out preventers like is used in the North Sea would be a good back up. B O P's are expensive, but clearly not as expensive as what is going on now.
My guess is we will learn the initial explosion was from a lack of safety equipment AND human error AND things need to be higher tech for such extreme conditions in the first place. We'll see. We'll all see.
Nora, how dare you blame the men who were killed for the accident. They were only following the orders of money-hungry men who were following the orders of other money-hungry men.
Why don't you try saying that directly to the families of the dead men?
Nora what is wrong with you? How did you ever develop this degree of insensitivity?
Other oil companies should not be punished for BP's mess.
What we should do is get rid of the moral hazard created by the liability cap and the indirect and direct subsidies and bailouts. This will force oil companies to take more caution. Unfortunately, I don't see this happening; both the White House and the Congress are corporatists that will continue to play ball with big oil.
That's how capitalism works!
Two? The only way there will be any more like this since the oil companies are on notice and are probably doing second and third inspections and safety drills themselves, is if it gets helped along somehow by an outside entity ... if there are two it won't be an accident, it will be an 'on purpose'.
How would we ever accept dictatorship? We already do... tame
This guy could have LOST EVERYTHING... TWICE! What a MARROON!
For the next six months, the President would like his people to review hat's been approved, what likely failed, and what we need to change to protect ourselves. Meanwhile, he suggests that keepin' on keepin' on may not be the BEST idea. Then the folks with money charge in and demand they be allowed to keep risking OUR everything for THEIR profit.
F**K YOU!!! AND the horses you rode in on!
Anyone in their right mind knows that 6 months is not that long to figure out what happened and to make sure it's not repeated once again.
There's a reason why the opposition is categorized as a group wanting the continuation of the failed policies of the past.
Many of the replies to this article show that is so true. We must figure out what went so terribly wrong before we allow another drill to be sunk into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
Once again, we must figure out what went so terribly wrong before we allow another drill to be sunk into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
Do you disagree with this?
Rep Markey is no oil man is he? Well yes in a sense as he is a front man for the Venezuelan government which ships his district cheap oil for winter. But since when do we shut down entire industries after an accident for any length of time? Why did we wait almost 2 months before doing so? Have the bureaucrats done any inspections on the other rigs in that time period?
No argument on relieving Gen McChrystal. He went overboard. I do assume that the President acted more calmly then your recommendations in dealing with him though. Firing him is one thing but demoting a general officer is not something done often or lightly.
Powell was a military manager, an excellent one but not a combat leader. McChrystal is a combat soldier and leader of soldiers. Powell being a lifetime political officer would never have left himself be that public. McChrystal knew better but for whatever reason let himself go stupid. Anyway, apples and oranges.
McChrystal is gone! He knew that would happen, perhaps he just wanted out...?
But, drilling should cease immediately the Gulf, their records wity hurricanes doesn't bode well for future drilling exploits.
I saw D.L. Hughley and George Stephanopolous on the View and they both agreed, McChrystal doesn't have a problem with the policies so much as he had with Obama being black!
McChrystal is the shinning example of how loony some are in their blind bigotry of our president.
Actually so is the decision by the judge.
All their actions are made for their agenda,making Obama look bad,and not for the good of all.Which by the way is unconstitutional.
It's obvious that he wasn't qualified to be CEO of British Petroleum. It's obvious that he's incompetent. It's obvious that he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
Can you imagine what the anti-affirmative action crowd would be saying about this man if he were Black?
I can guarantee you that no one would be apologizing for his handling of the environmental disaster.
Insanity!
His lack of judgment, drunken sailor antics, and disrespect for protocol is what finally did him in.