Gulf Oil Spill & Continuous Outpour

[Ya Mu]

edit: There is plenty of blame to go around. This is a tragedy that has changed life as we know it. Even if all leaking oil was stopped today it would take many decades and possibly hundreds of years for balance to be achieved.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Ya Mu

[ralis]

Lots of things the Unions do make no sense! Unions bitch when the Jones Act is waived because they feel they're getting jipped out of "their work" - so since Obama is beholden to them ("we spent $60 million to get him elected") he's only going to piss them off once he's already pissed everyone else off - how many days in are we and the Jones act still hasnt been waived? You can knock Bush's Katrina response, but he waived that after 3 days and we had plenty of foreign help.

 

 

More Republican talking points!

 

 

ralis

[Encephalon]

More Republican talking points!

 

 

ralis

 

 

I just spent 40 minutes trying to find a source OTHER than a conservative/libertarian author/newsource that could back up this allegation that Obama's beholden relationship to the unions is exacerbating the oil catastrophe. Typically, an issue so blatantly obvious will register on the radar of all media outlets, regardless of political orientation. After all, there are plenty of left-wing journalists and media who do not dig Obama at all and generally recognize that the last piece of meaningful progressive legislation emanating from the White House was under Nixon, when the political center of gravity was farther to the left than today.

 

But I cannot find any evidence of this Jones Act hooplah anywhere except the Fox News noise machine and their compatriots. If you run a "Jones Act" search on Huffington you won't get a single thing. Huffington is not an unimpeachable source, but jesus-*u*ki*ng-christ, if this subject only registers on one end of the political spectrum, suspicions can be legitimately raised.

[de_paradise]

I just spent 40 minutes trying to find a source OTHER than a conservative/libertarian author/newsource that could back up this allegation that Obama's beholden relationship to the unions is exacerbating the oil catastrophe. Typically, an issue so blatantly obvious will register on the radar of all media outlets, regardless of political orientation. After all, there are plenty of left-wing journalists and media who do not dig Obama at all and generally recognize that the last piece of meaningful progressive legislation emanating from the White House was under Nixon, when the political center of gravity was farther to the left than today.

 

But I cannot find any evidence of this Jones Act hooplah anywhere except the Fox News noise machine and their compatriots. If you run a "Jones Act" search on Huffington you won't get a single thing. Huffington is not an unimpeachable source, but jesus-*u*ki*ng-christ, if this subject only registers on one end of the political spectrum, suspicions can be legitimately raised.

 

Here's the source article translated:http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standaard.be%2Fartikel%2Fdetail.aspx%3Fartikelid%3D542R5JNH%26word%3Djones%2Bact%2529&sl=auto&tl=en

 

 

The link to the unions is probably not true, but the decision to not waive the Jone's act is super stupid, and likely be based on something very dodgy.

[joeblast]

More Republican talking points!

 

 

I love it when I'm being accused of one sided-ness from...one sided-ness.

 

To stop and consider the political implications of procedure in the course of an emergency situation is deplorable.

[Ya Mu]

...

 

To stop and consider the political implications of procedure in the course of an emergency situation is deplorable.

Agreed. But your writings do, to many, come across as a walking ad for the young republicans.

I think this thread should not focus on political thinking but realize it will come out. BOTH parties are to blame for the shape our country is in. WE are to blame for being so damn complacent and letting it happen. GREED has won out over truth and Spirituality.

[joeblast]

hehe...true, but when one views oneself as "center" then the possibility arises that slightly left seems right at least I know I'm moderately right in the grand scheme of things and I'm well aware its both parties and consequent subjugations of either side that have given us a half-busted system - the polarization is evidence that some people simply dont want the country to continue as it was founded, they feel it needs to move past "those old ideas" - whereas I'm firmly of the opinion that those ideas are timeless, returning to founding principles is exactly the remedy needed, not a further departure!

 

complacency has no place when one needs to be fit to survive - making the masses complacent = exerting control. self awareness, self responsibility - utilize your bootstraps and achieve results. haha...there's no spiritual welfare, if you dont do the work, you dont get the achievement

 

isnt it ironic that the oil company with the largest push for renewable energy and "green" juxtaposition is the very one that so recklessly cut corners to the point of catastrophe? they even had haliburton telling them it was dangerous for chrissakes

[Ya Mu]

hehe...true, but when one views oneself as "center" then the possibility arises that slightly left seems right at least I know I'm moderately right in the grand scheme of things and I'm well aware its both parties and consequent subjugations of either side that have given us a half-busted system - the polarization is evidence that some people simply dont want the country to continue as it was founded, they feel it needs to move past "those old ideas" - whereas I'm firmly of the opinion that those ideas are timeless, returning to founding principles is exactly the remedy needed, not a further departure!

 

complacency has no place when one needs to be fit to survive - making the masses complacent = exerting control. self awareness, self responsibility - utilize your bootstraps and achieve results. haha...there's no spiritual welfare, if you dont do the work, you dont get the achievement

 

isnt it ironic that the oil company with the largest push for renewable energy and "green" juxtaposition is the very one that so recklessly cut corners to the point of catastrophe? they even had haliburton telling them it was dangerous for chrissakes

I think the "greenness" of BP was simply cover for their true intentions - kinda like holding up one hand and saying "look here" while the other hand did the real (dirty) work.

[gendao]

Edited June 16, 2010 by vortex

[Stigweard]

And we wonder why Laozi chose to abandon his government post and travel west on the back of a buffalo.

 

???

 

[trailmaker]

And we wonder why Laozi chose to abandon his government post and travel west on the back of a buffalo.

 

???

 

 

It's been said that he was disgusted...

[ralis]

It doesn't matter if the Jones Act is suspended or not, this oil gusher disaster is almost beyond hope! The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it. The link I am providing has excerpts of engineers stating their opinions from www.theoildrum.com.

 

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/06/worst-already-true-BP-well-now-unstoppable

[de_paradise]

Suckered by the right wing media. Oops.

 

FACT: International assistance is part of Gulf spill response

Deepwater Horizon Joint Information Center: "15 foreign-flagged vessels are involved" in response to spill. In an interview on the June 15 edition of Fox & Friends, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs stated that "foreign entities are operating within the Gulf that help us respond" to the oil spill. Further, in a June 15 press release, the Deepwater Horizon Incident Joint Information Center stated, "Currently, 15 foreign-flagged vessels are involved in the largest response to an oil spill in U.S. history." The center further explained, "No Jones Act waivers have been granted because none of these vessels have required such a waiver to conduct their operations in the Gulf of Mexico."

 

Looking closely at the Dutch article only the headline was foreign workers not allowed to help, but the text of the article was that the Jone's Act was an impediment, kind of trade barrier to modernize USA's oil skimmer technology over the years, not specifically in one point in time.

[joeblast]

Nice non-rebuttals - so the refusal of help didnt matter? What? Look at the oil gushing!! Why, there's boats from other countries there!

...yeah, its day 58 now. Reframing an argument after you've lost it or otherwise disregarding valid aspects of the opposing side of debate is merely a sign of a fragile ego - your point of view is still valid even if you "give up a point to the other side."

 

I dont need to reiterate that there are two problems, but here you are - the oil gushing, and the oil that has gushed - a solution to one will not be a solution to the other - so why treat a debate as if there was a single solution to both issues?

 

I'm sure you guys also refuse to believe that the administration distorted the "expert's" review and penned in their own recommendation right at the top of what the experts were led to believe was a comprehensive report - i.e. the deep water drilling ban, which makes NO sense to stop *all* of it and had that been tried with the expert panel they convened it would have been categorically rejected. But of course...sense, what's that? Mincing words? No problem - they recommended a 6 month ban on new permits, but of course the administration can take expert's words and twist to suit!

 

And now the "grill-BP" panel they've put together is full of people that basically believe we need to stop oil production, period... I tell ya, ya keep seeing so many things that say "these people are ass backwards" it makes you wonder what they're really trying to accomplish here. Yes, let's help further an oil squeeze and rising prices - then that wont make green over-subsidized products look quite so bad or expensive anymore - and of course, if Bush were still in office it would be "they're just trying to line their pockets by driving up the price of oil" but now that Obama is in office - nothing? You dont think "green" has been lining some people's pockets in the very same capacity that "black" has been lining some people's pockets? Look at the juxtaposition of companies like BP, GE...companies that make a shitload of money yet still pose themselves to get the highest amount of subsidies possible - they see the trend, jump on the bandwagon, put on a happy green face. Gimmicks abound.

 

Speaking of gimmicks, this thread has ceased to really have any sort of productive discussion going on - any objective observation is met with cries of "sycophant!!!" so it really brings into question the value of pointing out the obvious.

[ralis]

Nice non-rebuttals - so the refusal of help didnt matter? What? Look at the oil gushing!! Why, there's boats from other countries there!

...yeah, its day 58 now. Reframing an argument after you've lost it or otherwise disregarding valid aspects of the opposing side of debate is merely a sign of a fragile ego - your point of view is still valid even if you "give up a point to the other side."

 

I dont need to reiterate that there are two problems, but here you are - the oil gushing, and the oil that has gushed - a solution to one will not be a solution to the other - so why treat a debate as if there was a single solution to both issues?

 

I'm sure you guys also refuse to believe that the administration distorted the "expert's" review and penned in their own recommendation right at the top of what the experts were led to believe was a comprehensive report - i.e. the deep water drilling ban, which makes NO sense to stop *all* of it and had that been tried with the expert panel they convened it would have been categorically rejected. But of course...sense, what's that? Mincing words? No problem - they recommended a 6 month ban on new permits, but of course the administration can take expert's words and twist to suit!

 

And now the "grill-BP" panel they've put together is full of people that basically believe we need to stop oil production, period... I tell ya, ya keep seeing so many things that say "these people are ass backwards" it makes you wonder what they're really trying to accomplish here. Yes, let's help further an oil squeeze and rising prices - then that wont make green over-subsidized products look quite so bad or expensive anymore - and of course, if Bush were still in office it would be "they're just trying to line their pockets by driving up the price of oil" but now that Obama is in office - nothing? You dont think "green" has been lining some people's pockets in the very same capacity that "black" has been lining some people's pockets? Look at the juxtaposition of companies like BP, GE...companies that make a shitload of money yet still pose themselves to get the highest amount of subsidies possible - they see the trend, jump on the bandwagon, put on a happy green face. Gimmicks abound.

 

Speaking of gimmicks, this thread has ceased to really have any sort of productive discussion going on - any objective observation is met with cries of "sycophant!!!" so it really brings into question the value of pointing out the obvious.

 

 

At the present time, it serves no purpose to debate the politics around this problem. There is a very real possibility this well and the damage it is sustaining may blow out of control. What does that mean? The BOP is damaged and is tilting. What that means is the seal on the bottom of the BOP is deteriorating. Most likely from subsidence of the sand silt layer at the seabed. Therefor, if the BOP collapses then we are looking at a full blowout. Also there is evidence of other leaks at some distance from the wellhead, which means the casing is damaged. Furthermore, according to a Russian deep water research vessel crew member, there is evidence of subsidence in the surrounding area of the wellhead and another leak 7 miles away.

 

I will provide links later.

 

Comments and links on the use of the dispersant Corexit and the use of it needs to be stopped.

 

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2010/06/corexit-dispersant-rains-could-destroy-north-america

 

 

ralis

Edited June 17, 2010 by ralis

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Nice non-rebuttals - so the refusal of help didnt matter? What? Look at the oil gushing!! Why, there's boats from other countries there!

...yeah, its day 58 now. Reframing an argument after you've lost it or otherwise disregarding valid aspects of the opposing side of debate is merely a sign of a fragile ego - your point of view is still valid even if you "give up a point to the other side."

 

I dont need to reiterate that there are two problems, but here you are - the oil gushing, and the oil that has gushed - a solution to one will not be a solution to the other - so why treat a debate as if there was a single solution to both issues?

 

I'm sure you guys also refuse to believe that the administration distorted the "expert's" review and penned in their own recommendation right at the top of what the experts were led to believe was a comprehensive report - i.e. the deep water drilling ban, which makes NO sense to stop *all* of it and had that been tried with the expert panel they convened it would have been categorically rejected. But of course...sense, what's that? Mincing words? No problem - they recommended a 6 month ban on new permits, but of course the administration can take expert's words and twist to suit!

 

And now the "grill-BP" panel they've put together is full of people that basically believe we need to stop oil production, period... I tell ya, ya keep seeing so many things that say "these people are ass backwards" it makes you wonder what they're really trying to accomplish here. Yes, let's help further an oil squeeze and rising prices - then that wont make green over-subsidized products look quite so bad or expensive anymore - and of course, if Bush were still in office it would be "they're just trying to line their pockets by driving up the price of oil" but now that Obama is in office - nothing? You dont think "green" has been lining some people's pockets in the very same capacity that "black" has been lining some people's pockets? Look at the juxtaposition of companies like BP, GE...companies that make a shitload of money yet still pose themselves to get the highest amount of subsidies possible - they see the trend, jump on the bandwagon, put on a happy green face. Gimmicks abound.

 

Speaking of gimmicks, this thread has ceased to really have any sort of productive discussion going on - any objective observation is met with cries of "sycophant!!!" so it really brings into question the value of pointing out the obvious.

 

 

Joeblast, I wish I were as absolutely airtight, cocksure and confident in my worldview as you seem to be. Amazing! It's probably good that you apparently don't see the point of discussion in this thread any more, I'm sure you have much bigger fish to fry in much more important ponds! You seem like an important guy on your way to big things!! We shouldn't stand in your way!!

[ralis]

Joeblast, I wish I were as absolutely airtight, cocksure and confident in my worldview as you seem to be. Amazing! It's probably good that you apparently don't see the point of discussion in this thread any more, I'm sure you have much bigger fish to fry in much more important ponds! You seem like an important guy on your way to big things!! We shouldn't stand in your way!!

 

Well stated! I just wish he and others like him would take time to understand just how fallacious their arguments are. Maybe that is just too much to ask.

 

 

ralis

[joeblast]

*spins meat*

 

*shrugs*

 

[ralis]

Rep. Barton GOP (Texas) shill apologizes to BP for having to pay 20B into a fund to begin paying for damages.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/17/gop-outraged-by-shakedown_n_615686.html

 

 

ralis

[gendao]

^ Lol, that's just sickening! How the H*LL can anyone apologize to BP????

FACT: International assistance is part of Gulf spill response

Deepwater Horizon Joint Information Center: "15 foreign-flagged vessels are involved" in response to spill. In an interview on the June 15 edition of Fox & Friends, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs stated that "foreign entities are operating within the Gulf that help us respond" to the oil spill. Further, in a June 15 press release, the Deepwater Horizon Incident Joint Information Center stated, "Currently, 15 foreign-flagged vessels are involved in the largest response to an oil spill in U.S. history." The center further explained, "No Jones Act waivers have been granted because none of these vessels have required such a waiver to conduct their operations in the Gulf of Mexico."

 

Looking closely at the Dutch article only the headline was foreign workers not allowed to help, but the text of the article was that the Jone's Act was an impediment, kind of trade barrier to modernize USA's oil skimmer technology over the years, not specifically in one point in time.

Lol, well of course they are NOW (June 15!) accepting a little foreign help...but only as damage control after their refusal was leaked out & Obama's polls started dropping.

 

But this does NOT change the FACT that they repeatedly refused foreign help for as long as they could!

instead of using the Dutch ships and crews immediately, when The Netherlands offered help in April, the operation was delayed until U.S. crews could be trained.

It's true, if Bush was at the helm doing all this - he'd be crucified all over the media & internet. But Obama gets a free pass...because liberals are marketed as more "caring" and "green." Despite the fact that he alone is at the top of BP's payroll! Edited June 17, 2010 by vortex

[joeblast]

"Sorry for suddenly and retroactively changing the law that you've gone by in order to make your business calculations," you mean.

 

You dont see anything wrong with suddenly and retroactively changing the rules of the game?

 

The $75M cap is not applicable in the case of negligence, and BP is reliable regardless - but for some reason its appropriate for BP to pony up $20B right now, in effect simply playing ball so that they wont wind up having to pay more down the road?

 

You only point in one direction saying "those bastards!", Ralis.

[ralis]

"Sorry for suddenly and retroactively changing the law that you've gone by in order to make your business calculations," you mean.

 

You dont see anything wrong with suddenly and retroactively changing the rules of the game?

 

The $75M cap is not applicable in the case of negligence, and BP is reliable regardless - but for some reason its appropriate for BP to pony up $20B right now, in effect simply playing ball so that they wont wind up having to pay more down the road?

 

You only point in one direction saying "those bastards!", Ralis.

 

If BP isn't footing the bill, then who should? The taxpayers? Boehner Rep. GOP Ohio said the taxpayers should pay. Prove BP will not have to pay more "down the road." Your statement doesn't hold water!

 

Whenever I discuss the problems around this disaster, you never respond. You must be in the "drill baby drill" at all costs crowd.

 

BTW, I am not an apologist for this administration. I am only discussing the facts around what may become the worst man made environmental disaster.

 

ralis

Edited June 17, 2010 by ralis

[joeblast]

The point isnt whether or not BP foots the bill, its the quid pro quo that took place in getting that escrow fund set up - also the point is law is already established here, but to go back and retroactively change the law after the fact - that is like burning your house down and then obtaining insurance and subsequent payout on it - skirting the rules to obtain "a more desired outcome," whimsical though it may be.

 

Regardless, notice what happened to BP's stock prices when they set up the escrow fund - magical turnaround, eh? What I was ostensibly saying was that by acceding to Obama's rewriting of the rules mid-game, BP played ball and likely saved the long term solvency of the company. A third party manages the escrow fund, saving BP from having to deal with it themselves and also be exposed to the totality of tort cases. Trust me, with how little resistance BP put up to such a measure, they knew it was in their best interest to do so!

 

This is what I detest about overregulation - the players keep getting the rules changed on them. What kind of a setup is that when your bottom line keeps changing? It screws up your whole ability to make long term plans.

 

Frankly if I had a solution, I'd be calling up BP - but I dont, so when you make a statement about the seabed and I dont address it...what does that mean? You're extremely naive if you think we can just stop all the drilling - think Councilor Hamann in the Matrix "Of course. That's it. You hit it. That's control, isn't it? If we wanted we could smash them to bits. Although, if we did, we'd have to consider what would happen to our lights, our heat, our air..." (...of course our air isnt dependent on oil.) But out energy consumption is absolutely dependent on oil, and unless we're prepared to ostensibly cover the earth in solar panels and windmills, "alternative" energy isnt going to cut it. At least not until we have developed a viable fusion reactor.

 

BP frigged up cutting corners trying to save a few bucks, and they should be held liable. But since we are a nation of laws, the laws should be followed and not changed or "Progressed past" at the whims of the public or whomever happens to hold office.

[Trunk]

Rachel Maddow gives the speech she wishes Obama had given.

 

[DarthBane]

Politics and evil reign supreme. How long do we have to wait?