Big oil: oversight not the problem

As usual, the Democrats at The Swamp are trying to hide the real, page 1, story on this--how the Obama administration is HALTING efforts to clean up the spill. Last night ABC News had a lead story of how Obama's administration halted the state of Louisiana's barges from sucking up the oil. See http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379 for the story of such incompetence, you wonder whether the administration is doing this on purpose.

"unforeseeable event" must mean they couldn't read the pressure gauge at 3000 PSI.
--

"unforeseeable event" must mean taking shortcuts to compromise safety- such as pumping salt water instead of mud.
--

"unforeseeable event" must mean coming up with a plan that saves the Walruses but not the shrimp industry.
----

I see where this is going. . .the Sea will be red if this oil doesn't stop. We don't even know if the 2nd and 3rd drilling is going to really help. If you think about it? Logically, drilling a relief well only reduce pressure. . .but by how much? If this thing doesn't get cap, there is no emergency plan!
---

Sounds like the seafood industry will have to start fish/shrimp farms on land. That's the emergency plan the federal govt better take a look at! Instead of giving out free checks. . .invest in the new fish farm industries.

Bruce is right the real story is how incompetent the response to the spill has been. Barry is a joke and a bad one at that!!!

Worst President Ever!!!

Our government inaction:
.
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379&page=1
.

Follow the money the next time they try and do something about anything in DC:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9GCH3QO0.htm

And they'll all claim they had no idea where their money is invested.

Okay they are straightening out the MMS that is something that needed to be done. Like so many other government agencies and departments probably need same thing done to them. And there will be deep water drilling in the future. If there's one thing that a disaster does what it happens in America is to inspire the American spirit of "the can do" attitude. I have no doubts that this attitude will produce a safe way to drill in deep water.

OK, right wingers.

Now you're claiming it's all the government's fault.

I thought you didn't like "big government".

Now you seem to be saying you do like big government, when it is claimed to be needed to clean up after a big oil company.

Big government, according to you, is supposed to be a giant, Paul Bunyan type nanny, standing nearby BP's oil rigs with a giant vacuum cleaner to suck up its "spills".

Like "burping the baby". As nannies do.

You want a big nanny government for BP--to "burp the BP".

Posted by: Just sayin' | June 18, 2010 10:36 AM
*
*
As your story says, the Coast Guard wouldn't let the barges out because they all lacked fire extinguishers and life vests. Safety of people in boats is one of the main functions of the Coast Guard, so I'm glad that they did this right. We've already seen stories about workers cleaning up oil on boats and beaches getting sick from the chemical dispersant that BP dumped all over the Gulf; why do you want more Americans to risk their health over BP's lack of caring about safety regulations?

BIG SHAKEUP AT BP:

The Drudge Report is reporting that Tony Hayward has been relieved of managerial duties in BP shakeup

A day after he was grilled by Congress, BP chief executive Tony Hayward is being demoted. According to Britain's Sky News, BP Managing Director Bob Dudley will take over day-to-day oversight of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill while BP's chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg (he of the "small people" comment) will assume major PR duties. (Yes, you read that right—the BP executive who famously expressed his compassion for "the small people" will be tasked with enhancing the company's public image.)

The main reason for the shift is plain enough for anyone who's been following the spill: BP executives acknowledge Hayward has blown it as the company's face during the crisis. Svanberg, while defending the BP CEO, acknowledged the Hayward's comments have not been helpful to the company's efforts to control fallout from the disaster.

So Hornery you approve of Barrys response(or lack of) to the spill?

Ornery,

I thought you libs said big gov't was the answer to all problems.

This is a task that gov't should habdle due to the amount of resources needed and the infrequency they are needed. It would not make sense for each oil company to have all the necessary assets on hand necessary to clean up a spill of this magnitude. This is where the Feds need to step in, do the work and send BP the bill.

The Feds need to get out of functions that can be handled by the individual or a samller unit of gov't. Those tasks include, but are not limited to, retirment funding, health insurance, education, highways, etc...

Leotard,

It seems Obama is the only one actually making any kind of systemic response.

Incidentally, what would you be doing in the unlikely event you had been elected President in 2008?

Ornery,

"Obama is the only one actually making any kind of systemic response." Too bad this is not a "systemic" problem. It is ONE well in the gulf that is leaking out of 30,000. That is not a system problem.

What Obama should do is throw all the resources he can behind this clean-up - that would first start with signing an executive order tempoarily repealing the Jones Act. He should have let Gov Jindal put in the sand burms w/o the red tape. He should have got every boom available in the country instead of letting some sit in inventory in Maine.

T, there you go again.

Retirement savings an individual concern? Yes, to an extent. But millions of impoverished elders in the 1930's led FDR to the creation of the Social Security system.

Bush wanted to "privatize" Social Security. Luckily, he failed.

Those who did have private retirement funds mostly found their savings halved.

Joe Sixpack? Well, he didn't have any private savings to speak of. But he's kinda glad the govt. withheld taxes for Social Security all those years so there would be some light at the end of the tunnel.

I was just having a little fun pointing out the hypocrisy of the right:

They now love Big Government Nanny and want it to "Burp the BP".

Do you see the irony?

OK , perhaps you don't.....

* * * * *
Posted by: ornery | June 18, 2010 11:12 AM
.
Let’s see if I can help sort this out for you.
.
First of all, in classical terminology, those on the “right wing” (of the hall) favored an all powerful, enveloping government. The ‘left-right’ terminology came from the seating arrangement of the French Parliament, with the aristocracy and nobility seated on the right side of the hall and the “classical liberals” seated to the left. Conceptually, then, anarchists would be on the extreme left and those who favor totalitarian government would sit at the extreme right. Using this model, small-government Libertarian types would sit to the left of center, and both Republicans and Democrats would sit to the right (with Democrats even further to the right than Republicans). This description makes more sense than the alternate “traditionalist vs. social justice” groupings used to define ‘left’ versus ‘right’ today. The latter simply does not lend itself to consistency in mapping political views (much the same way the Keynesian redefinition of terms like “inflation” doesn’t properly explain economic phenomena.)
.
In any event, you incorrectly describe “small government” types as “right wingers.” The way you use it, it no longer serves as a descriptive term as much as a derogatory epithet.
.
In the second place, those who dislike “big government” aren’t anarchist: they do not dislike ALL government. They believe, however, that government ought to be limited to those tasks it can perform well. In the case of the federal government, that includes those functions that people or individual states cannot perform by themselves. (This is the common thread in the Constitution’s description of the federal government’s functions.) Thus, small government people aren’t opposed to government doing the job it’s supposed to do as vigorously as necessary to get the job done. In addition, they do expect government to adequately perform the functions delegated to it.
.
One of those tasks consists of cleaning up oil spills in offshore waters. The federal government has the task of protecting the environment as part of its job of defending the nation, handling international affairs, and regulating and protecting the channels of interstate and international commerce. The current spill has damaged property in multiple states, or threatens to do so. No single state has the means to handle the spill. Thus, of all government entities, the federal government is the one that was (and is) supposed to respond to the spill in a timely and competent manner.
.
In contrast, the federal government has spent trillions and trillions of dollars, and filled the books with thousands of federal laws and regulations that have nothing to do with any of its constitutionally delegated duties. In doing so, it has arrogated to itself functions for which the states and individuals are equally competent to perform themselves. THESE are the laws and functions to which small government folks object.
.
Do you see the difference now?

Ornery,

Retirement as anindividual concern, most definitely. MAny had their retirement funds cut in 1/2. Half a nominal 6% return is still better than the less than 2% return that SS gives the avergae individual.

Why couldn't Joe SixPack be responsible for his own retirment. Take that 12.4% of his earnings that is shipped to the gov't and out that into his IRA. Say Joe SixPack makes $50K per year - he would be putting in $6,000 per year into his own retirement fund, not into a giant pot of money that the federal gov't spends on something else and replaces it with an IOU. Current Social Security is nothing but a generational Ponzi Scheme.

I see the irony you are rying to point out, but the the opposite side of the irony coin is the left thinks big gov't can solve all problems and they are showing themselves as a bureaucratic failure when they need to shining.

Do you see the irony?