Shame on you BP!!!
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
There are people along the coast of La. that are putting up signs such as SHAME ON YOU BP!!!. Mostly YOUNG people are doing this. GOOD FOR THEM!!!!!:mad::mad::mad:
Shame on you BP!!!
Perhaps you could organize a consumer boycott of their products?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Betty Boop
- Posts: 16985
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:17 pm
- Location: The end of the World
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1312036 wrote: Perhaps you could organize a consumer boycott of their products?
Where would that start and end
should think it would be pretty hard.
Where would that start and end
should think it would be pretty hard.-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
Betty Boop;1312049 wrote: Where would that start and end should think it would be pretty hard. here in La. everything is so oil related. the only thing is to boycott their gas stations. so much is made from oil related product. no way to know if BP's oil made it.
should think it would be pretty hard. here in La. everything is so oil related. the only thing is to boycott their gas stations. so much is made from oil related product. no way to know if BP's oil made it.Shame on you BP!!!
"The closest thing to a movement is a “Boycott BP Facebook page with 4,500 fans—not exactly the Million Man March."
Louisiana Couldn?t Boycott BP Even if It Wanted To | The Big Money
An interesting Read Southern Yankee.
Louisiana Couldn?t Boycott BP Even if It Wanted To | The Big Money
An interesting Read Southern Yankee.
Shame on you BP!!!
Make 'em pay for the entire cleanup.
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
I think that is what is going to Happen, saint. bUT AS MUCH MONEY AS THE CORP. has it really is no big deal. Look what happen in TX. city, and in ALASKA. Vitter (sen of La.) has said this from the start for BP to get out of the way. But it does not help the marsh lands now. right now is nesting season. and the fishermen. yes Bp is paying them to help in the clean up. WHY?? should they have to they are fishermen. not toxic waiste removers:mad::mad::mad:
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
:-5Last nite my Gov. was on the local news and Stated that if the oil
keeps coming. that within 5 to 7 days the MARSHES will die. Now, There is nothing more to say:-5:-5:-5
-1:-1
keeps coming. that within 5 to 7 days the MARSHES will die. Now, There is nothing more to say:-5:-5:-5
-1:-1Shame on you BP!!!
Here is a radical idea..how about driving a smaller car that gets better mileage so there won't be such a big demand for gas--then they won't drill for as much-- in harder to reach places which are more hazardous. Just an idea you understand.......
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
FUBAR;1312210 wrote: Here is a radical idea..how about driving a smaller car that gets better mileage so there won't be such a big demand for gas--then they won't drill for as much-- in harder to reach places which are more hazardous. Just an idea you understand....... That does Nothing for the problem at hand now. Yes agree all this is due to greed. Who's greed is the problem?? But passing the buck. will not save the wildlife, or give the fishermen back their jobs. The fines should be so ungodly stiff. that nothing like this will happen again. Put NO limit on the amount that has to be dished out. Put the company UNDER. So all others will think twice on where and what they are doing. This is a man made Katrina. I feel life in the gulf coast will never be the same. IN OUR LIFE TIME. oR PERHAPS our childern, if ever.
That does Nothing for the problem at hand now. Yes agree all this is due to greed. Who's greed is the problem?? But passing the buck. will not save the wildlife, or give the fishermen back their jobs. The fines should be so ungodly stiff. that nothing like this will happen again. Put NO limit on the amount that has to be dished out. Put the company UNDER. So all others will think twice on where and what they are doing. This is a man made Katrina. I feel life in the gulf coast will never be the same. IN OUR LIFE TIME. oR PERHAPS our childern, if ever.
Shame on you BP!!!
36 Days and counting..........What have the Feds done besides point fingers....
NADA ZILCH!!!
Could this be one of the reasons?
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
My problem comes with this statement:
Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.
Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.
Obama '08 Ad: Nothing's Changed
Obama: Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.
I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.
I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them.
NADA ZILCH!!!
Could this be one of the reasons?
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
My problem comes with this statement:
Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.
Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.
Obama '08 Ad: Nothing's Changed
Obama: Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.
I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.
I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312292 wrote: 36 Days and counting..........What have the Feds done besides point fingers....
NADA ZILCH!!!
Could this be one of the reasons?
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
My problem comes with this statement:
Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.
Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.
Obama '08 Ad: Nothing's Changed
Obama: Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.
I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.
I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them.
you know i really don't care who cleans up the mess. just somebody PLEASE!!
NADA ZILCH!!!
Could this be one of the reasons?
During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.
My problem comes with this statement:
Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.
Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.
Obama '08 Ad: Nothing's Changed
Obama: Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.
I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.
I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them.
you know i really don't care who cleans up the mess. just somebody PLEASE!!
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312031 wrote: There are people along the coast of La. that are putting up signs such as SHAME ON YOU BP!!!. Mostly YOUNG people are doing this. GOOD FOR THEM!!!!!:mad::mad::mad:
I agree. Good for them.
A word for BP though. They obeyed all the laws that the government required.
So maybe the government should cop some of the blame as well.
I agree. Good for them.
A word for BP though. They obeyed all the laws that the government required.
So maybe the government should cop some of the blame as well.
Shame on you BP!!!
Although as you pointed out above,... the oil companies "buy" the laws anyways.
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312250 wrote: That does Nothing for the problem at hand now. Yes agree all this is due to greed. Who's greed is the problem?? But passing the buck. will not save the wildlife, or give the fishermen back their jobs. The fines should be so ungodly stiff. that nothing like this will happen again. Put NO limit on the amount that has to be dished out. Put the company UNDER. So all others will think twice on where and what they are doing. This is a man made Katrina. I feel life in the gulf coast will never be the same. IN OUR LIFE TIME. oR PERHAPS our childern, if ever.
It isn't the fines that will stop future events but refusing any further exploration. We will all have to learn to live with what we have already got. As long as people go shopping in an SUV the demand will increase and the exploration for more oil in riskier places is going to continue so there will be more accidents that cause even more damage.
It isn't the fines that will stop future events but refusing any further exploration. We will all have to learn to live with what we have already got. As long as people go shopping in an SUV the demand will increase and the exploration for more oil in riskier places is going to continue so there will be more accidents that cause even more damage.
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312250 wrote: This is a man made Katrina. I feel life in the gulf coast will never be the same. IN OUR LIFE TIME. oR PERHAPS our childern, if ever.You know, you do seem to be reveling in it a bit. The Brittany coastline had a far worse pollution event and three years later it was undetectable. Can you think of any oil-at-sea incident that had environmental consequences longer-lasting than that? Or do you think this one's completely unprecedented and nobody ever had one like it before?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1312310 wrote: You know, you do seem to be reveling in it a bit. The Brittany coastline had a far worse pollution event and three years later it was undetectable. Can you think of any oil-at-sea incident that had environmental consequences longer-lasting than that? Or do you think this one's completely unprecedented and nobody ever had one like it before?
Our shores are more important than your shores.
Our shores are more important than your shores.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
Nomad;1312314 wrote: Our shores are more important than your shores.
I'd worked that bit out quite a while ago, yes.
I'd worked that bit out quite a while ago, yes.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312295 wrote: you know i really don't care who cleans up the mess. just somebody PLEASE!!
It may be TOO late. While draggin BP's BIG asses up in front of congress to posture, the oil just kept a creepin in.............and creepin till it is now doing major damage.
Why wasn't the EPA allowing the states to do some preventive maneuvers? That is the REAL question.
Also, what in the hell are you gonna do now that it it at your front door?
There is no plan...
It may be TOO late. While draggin BP's BIG asses up in front of congress to posture, the oil just kept a creepin in.............and creepin till it is now doing major damage.
Why wasn't the EPA allowing the states to do some preventive maneuvers? That is the REAL question.
Also, what in the hell are you gonna do now that it it at your front door?
There is no plan...
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Shame on you BP!!!
preearth;1312301 wrote: I agree. Good for them.
A word for BP though. They obeyed all the laws that the government required.
So maybe the government should cop some of the blame as well.
U.S. Exempted BP from Environmental Review
A word for BP though. They obeyed all the laws that the government required.
So maybe the government should cop some of the blame as well.
U.S. Exempted BP from Environmental Review
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312318 wrote: U.S. Exempted BP from Environmental Review
BP had a series of mishaps and neglected routine procedures prior to the spill. Clearly BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the disaster. To slant the blame towards Obama is a blatantly obvious attempt to skew the reality of the events and use the opportunity to once again voice your disdain for the opponent.
You diminish your validity by constantly angling truths to suit your own desires.
BP had a series of mishaps and neglected routine procedures prior to the spill. Clearly BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the disaster. To slant the blame towards Obama is a blatantly obvious attempt to skew the reality of the events and use the opportunity to once again voice your disdain for the opponent.
You diminish your validity by constantly angling truths to suit your own desires.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
Nomad;1312328 wrote: You diminish your validity by constantly angling truths to suit your own desires.
Not least by that pitiable total of $66,146 in campaign contributions from the entire employee and management base of the US oil industry, out of the - what was it? $400 million his election team managed to raise? I think it just emphasized where the oil industry's support lay: it certainly wasn't in the Democrat camp.
Not least by that pitiable total of $66,146 in campaign contributions from the entire employee and management base of the US oil industry, out of the - what was it? $400 million his election team managed to raise? I think it just emphasized where the oil industry's support lay: it certainly wasn't in the Democrat camp.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1312330 wrote: Not least by that pitiable total of $66,146 in campaign contributions from the entire employee and management base of the US oil industry, out of the - what was it? $400 million his election team managed to raise? I think it just emphasized where the oil industry's support lay: it certainly wasn't in the Democrat camp.
I recognize that as sarcasm.
Politicians accept funds from all types of industries. Thats how the machine works.
Would a contribution to a campaign or any Senate office cause them to go soft or be derelict in their duty when something as catastrophic as this happens?
I dont think so.
I recognize that as sarcasm.
Politicians accept funds from all types of industries. Thats how the machine works.
Would a contribution to a campaign or any Senate office cause them to go soft or be derelict in their duty when something as catastrophic as this happens?
I dont think so.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
Nomad;1312328 wrote: BP had a series of mishaps and neglected routine procedures prior to the spill. Clearly BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the disaster. To slant the blame towards Obama is a blatantly obvious attempt to skew the reality of the events and use the opportunity to once again voice your disdain for the opponent.
You diminish your validity by constantly angling truths to suit your own desires.
NO NO Nomad...........
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
You diminish your validity by constantly angling truths to suit your own desires.
NO NO Nomad...........
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312347 wrote: What have I skewed?
The left hip pocket bit, of course.
The left hip pocket bit, of course.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312347 wrote: NO NO Nomad...........
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
Excuse me for the interruption, Dr's appt.
The skewed part appears when the entire truth isnt presented, only the part that coincides with your own beliefs.
The EPA was negligent in not requiring a blow out valve which is what failed causing the spill.
Why was the blowout valve not required?
The Wall Street Journal reports that the oil well didn't have a remote-control shut-off switch. The reason it didn't have a thing that it seems every single offshore drilling rig should have? It's because Dick Cheney's energy task force decided that the $500,000 switches were too expensive, and they didn't want to make BP buy any.
That task force, of course, being the semi shady National Energy Policy Development Group, a group formed during Bush's first weeks in office and chaired by Cheney. But look: there's a lot of blame to go around here. There's Transocean which owned the well; BP, which ran that well's operations; rogue environmentalists looking to make a point. (There's also Cheney's former company, Haliburton, which is under investigation for doing shoddy subcontracting work that may have led to the mine's blowout, and possibly God.
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
Excuse me for the interruption, Dr's appt.
The skewed part appears when the entire truth isnt presented, only the part that coincides with your own beliefs.
The EPA was negligent in not requiring a blow out valve which is what failed causing the spill.
Why was the blowout valve not required?
The Wall Street Journal reports that the oil well didn't have a remote-control shut-off switch. The reason it didn't have a thing that it seems every single offshore drilling rig should have? It's because Dick Cheney's energy task force decided that the $500,000 switches were too expensive, and they didn't want to make BP buy any.
That task force, of course, being the semi shady National Energy Policy Development Group, a group formed during Bush's first weeks in office and chaired by Cheney. But look: there's a lot of blame to go around here. There's Transocean which owned the well; BP, which ran that well's operations; rogue environmentalists looking to make a point. (There's also Cheney's former company, Haliburton, which is under investigation for doing shoddy subcontracting work that may have led to the mine's blowout, and possibly God.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
Maybe instead of a boycott, we stop voting for shills for the industries. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
At this point, it's probably too late to reverse all the damage.
At this point, it's probably too late to reverse all the damage.
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312347 wrote: NO NO Nomad...........
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
You want to blame the elected government, but ultimately, it's the voter that is responsible. I didn't vote for Bush, partly because of his horrible environmental record. Did you? I suspect you are partly responsible.
As for Obama, it's true he isn't the "greenest" candidate, and buckled under industry pressure. But he was better than that pair of DRILL-BABY-DRILL knuckleheads that he ran against.
If you are seriously saying the spill wouldn't have happened if McCain were elected, you might want to check what planet you are living on. McCain promised to turn the oil industry loose everywhere.
So why in hell do we have a EPA if they are gonna stonewall and set on their duffs while the eminent happens to our fellow citizens.
Shame on both of them but unfortunately Obama can not blame this on Bush as he has done for the last 1 1/2 years....
Furthermore, with BP in his left hip pocket you can bet the kid gloves won't come off anytime soon.
What have I skewed?
You want to blame the elected government, but ultimately, it's the voter that is responsible. I didn't vote for Bush, partly because of his horrible environmental record. Did you? I suspect you are partly responsible.
As for Obama, it's true he isn't the "greenest" candidate, and buckled under industry pressure. But he was better than that pair of DRILL-BABY-DRILL knuckleheads that he ran against.
If you are seriously saying the spill wouldn't have happened if McCain were elected, you might want to check what planet you are living on. McCain promised to turn the oil industry loose everywhere.
-
Bill Sikes
- Posts: 5515
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am
Shame on you BP!!!
BP's 'top kill' method stops flow of oil in Gulf of Mexico - Telegraph
Unclear whether completely stopped, though. Permenant method to be emplaced.
Unclear whether completely stopped, though. Permenant method to be emplaced.
Shame on you BP!!!
BTS;1312318 wrote: Exempted BP from Environmental Review[/URL]
Were all oil companies drilling in the same area given this (partial) exemption?
Were all oil companies drilling in the same area given this (partial) exemption?
Shame on you BP!!!
Nomad;1312328 wrote: BP had a series of mishaps and neglected routine procedures prior to the spill. Clearly BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the disaster. To slant the blame towards Obama is a blatantly obvious attempt to skew the reality of the events and use the opportunity to once again voice your disdain for the opponent.
It is true that I don't like Obama much. He outright lies too much.
But that has nothing to do with whether BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the mess.
It is true that I don't like Obama much. He outright lies too much.
But that has nothing to do with whether BP owns the lions share of responsibility for the mess.
-
southern yankee
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
now the fishermen who went there to help are b eing taken to the hospital. not enough training BP says. Well heck, who's fault is that????:-5:-5:-5
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312559 wrote: now the fishermen who went there to help are b eing taken to the hospital. not enough training BP says. Well heck, who's fault is that????:-5:-5:-5
Yeah,... just like those who went to help at the World Trade Center.
Yeah,... just like those who went to help at the World Trade Center.
Shame on you BP!!!
southern yankee;1312559 wrote: now the fishermen who went there to help are b eing taken to the hospital. not enough training BP says. Well heck, who's fault is that????:-5:-5:-5
They need to have the BP executives out in the marsh cleaning up the toxic waste. If they want to keep all the profits, they need to do the work.
They need to have the BP executives out in the marsh cleaning up the toxic waste. If they want to keep all the profits, they need to do the work.
-
Bill Sikes
- Posts: 5515
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am
Shame on you BP!!!
I am inclined to think, that whilst the disaster may be blamed on BP and others, that "Uncle Sam" is being disingeneous. Who let drilling be done in the Gulf of Mexico in the first place, whilst knowing full well that accidents do happen?
There are various interesting "takes" on the matter:
BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns:
BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns | Environment | The Guardian
Good for the economy and good for the environment: See (from 2006):
Offshore Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico | FreedomWorks
and most USAians still seem to support drilling:
Offshore drilling supported despite Gulf of Mexico oil leak, poll suggests | NOLA.com
Isn't it all *frightfully* interesting!
Still, much sympathy here for the polluted areas.
There are various interesting "takes" on the matter:
BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns:
BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns | Environment | The Guardian
Good for the economy and good for the environment: See (from 2006):
Offshore Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico | FreedomWorks
and most USAians still seem to support drilling:
Offshore drilling supported despite Gulf of Mexico oil leak, poll suggests | NOLA.com
Isn't it all *frightfully* interesting!
Still, much sympathy here for the polluted areas.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
Shame on you BP!!!
If it was BP's fault then damn them. Screw them for everything that Exxon Valdez had to pay for Alaska and more in proportion.
What was Halliburton's involvement?
If it was BP's fault then damn them. Screw them for everything that Exxon Valdez had to pay for Alaska and more in proportion.
What was Halliburton's involvement?
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Shame on you BP!!!
Having a home located along the gulf, this is going to be a long summer. With a little luck the BP spill will not reach our place.
I believe the oil leak is BPs to clean up. But at the same time I've been dismayed with the Presidents apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster.
I believe the oil leak is BPs to clean up. But at the same time I've been dismayed with the Presidents apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster.
Shame on you BP!!!
Macadamia;1314402 wrote: I believe the oil leak is BPs to clean up. But at the same time I've been dismayed with the Presidents apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster.
He's visited Louisiana three times since the spill started? He's cancelled his Far East trip twice in order to stay on watch while it's unresolved? All because domestic public opinion would otherwise say he had an "apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster"?
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
He's visited Louisiana three times since the spill started? He's cancelled his Far East trip twice in order to stay on watch while it's unresolved? All because domestic public opinion would otherwise say he had an "apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster"?
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1314412 wrote: He's visited Louisiana three times since the spill started? He's cancelled his Far East trip twice in order to stay on watch while it's unresolved? All because domestic public opinion would otherwise say he had an "apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster"?
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
Wow. I hate to say this. I mean I really really hate to say this but I agree with you. Im going to scrub myself with Ajax and a Brillo pad again.
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
Wow. I hate to say this. I mean I really really hate to say this but I agree with you. Im going to scrub myself with Ajax and a Brillo pad again.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1314412 wrote: He's visited Louisiana three times since the spill started? He's cancelled his Far East trip twice in order to stay on watch while it's unresolved? All because domestic public opinion would otherwise say he had an "apparent lack of interest in the BP disaster"?
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
And our "singular focused" President has also:
–Two days of media events (White House Correspondents Dinner and a tête a tête with Bono)
–Three days of fundraising
–Four commemorations (graduations, Cinco de Mayo, etc)
–Six days of vacation
–Six days of campaigning
–Six sports events
–Seven days of golf
Geez, if that’s singular focus, I’d hate to see him distracted! it is little wonder Obama's approval ratings over the spill are in the 20s. Maybe today's lifting of the whale ban, undoubtably pleasing environmentalists world wide, will lower his approval of the gulf spill into the teens.
That's no way to run a country. It's a local problem, you have local politicians, everything's "I want it all but not in my back yard" and now you have the goddamn opportunistic cheek to criticize Washington too.
And our "singular focused" President has also:
–Two days of media events (White House Correspondents Dinner and a tête a tête with Bono)
–Three days of fundraising
–Four commemorations (graduations, Cinco de Mayo, etc)
–Six days of vacation
–Six days of campaigning
–Six sports events
–Seven days of golf
Geez, if that’s singular focus, I’d hate to see him distracted! it is little wonder Obama's approval ratings over the spill are in the 20s. Maybe today's lifting of the whale ban, undoubtably pleasing environmentalists world wide, will lower his approval of the gulf spill into the teens.
Shame on you BP!!!
The man has a country to run and several wars to prosecute, what do you want him to do? Pull on dungarees and pick up a shovel?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
Liz Cheney states this is Obamas responsibility because it happened on his watch. Stands to reason 9/11 was her dads fault.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1314415 wrote: The man has a country to run and several wars to prosecute, what do you want him to do? Pull on dungarees and pick up a shovel?
You may not like it Spot, but our President is linked to the spill. Being the nations leader, during one of worst ecological disasters, Obamas actions are being watched closely by the public, and they do not like what they see. He is paying a price for it in the polls.
I had a chuckle over Charles Krauthammers write up on the spill and Obama - in particular the last few well said paragraphs.
A disaster with many fathers
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 28, 2010
Here's my question: Why were we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?
THIS STORY
Our Deepwater wake-up call
A disaster with many fathers
Obama holds his own on BP
View All Items in This Story
Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
So we go deep, ultra deep -- to such a technological frontier that no precedent exists for the April 20 blowout in the Gulf of Mexico.
There will always be catastrophic oil spills. You make them as rare as humanly possible, but where would you rather have one: in the Gulf of Mexico, upon which thousands depend for their livelihood, or in the Arctic, where there are practically no people? All spills seriously damage wildlife. That's a given. But why have we pushed the drilling from the barren to the populated, from the remote wilderness to a center of fishing, shipping, tourism and recreation?
Not that the environmentalists are the only ones to blame. Not by far. But it is odd that they've escaped any mention at all.
The other culprits are pretty obvious. It starts with BP, which seems not only to have had an amazing string of perfect-storm engineering lapses but no contingencies to deal with a catastrophic system failure.
However, the railing against BP for its performance since the accident is harder to understand. I attribute no virtue to BP, just self-interest. What possible interest can it have to do anything but cap the well as quickly as possible? Every day that oil is spilled means millions more in losses, cleanup and restitution.
Federal officials who rage against BP would like to deflect attention from their own role in this disaster. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, whose department's laxity in environmental permitting and safety oversight renders it among the many bearing responsibility, expresses outrage at BP's inability to stop the leak, and even threatens to "push them out of the way."
"To replace them with what?" asked the estimable, admirably candid Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander. No one has the assets and expertise of BP. The federal government can fight wars, conduct a census and hand out billions in earmarks, but it has not a clue how to cap a one-mile-deep out-of-control oil well.
Obama didn't help much with his finger-pointing Rose Garden speech in which he denounced finger-pointing, then proceeded to blame everyone but himself. Even the grace note of admitting some federal responsibility turned sour when he reflexively added that these problems have been going on "for a decade or more" -- translation: Bush did it -- while, in contrast, his own interior secretary had worked diligently to solve the problem "from the day he took office."
Really? Why hadn't we heard a thing about this? What about the September 2009 letter from Obama's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration accusing Interior's Minerals Management Service of understating the "risk and impacts" of a major oil spill? When you get a blowout 15 months into your administration, and your own Interior Department had given BP a "categorical" environmental exemption in April 2009, the buck stops.
In the end, speeches will make no difference. If BP can cap the well in time to prevent an absolute calamity in the gulf, the president will escape politically. If it doesn't -- if the gusher isn't stopped before the relief wells are completed in August -- it will become Obama's Katrina.
That will be unfair, because Obama is no more responsible for the damage caused by this than Bush was for the damage caused by Katrina. But that's the nature of American politics and its presidential cult of personality: We expect our presidents to play Superman. Helplessness, however undeniable, is no defense.
Moreover, Obama has never been overly modest about his own powers. Two years ago next week, he declared that history will mark his ascent to the presidency as the moment when "our planet began to heal" and "the rise of the oceans began to slow."
Well, when you anoint yourself King Canute, you mustn't be surprised when your subjects expect you to command the tides.
letters@charleskrauthammer.com
You may not like it Spot, but our President is linked to the spill. Being the nations leader, during one of worst ecological disasters, Obamas actions are being watched closely by the public, and they do not like what they see. He is paying a price for it in the polls.
I had a chuckle over Charles Krauthammers write up on the spill and Obama - in particular the last few well said paragraphs.
A disaster with many fathers
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 28, 2010
Here's my question: Why were we drilling in 5,000 feet of water in the first place?
THIS STORY
Our Deepwater wake-up call
A disaster with many fathers
Obama holds his own on BP
View All Items in This Story
Many reasons, but this one goes unmentioned: Environmental chic has driven us out there. As production from the shallower Gulf of Mexico wells declines, we go deep (1,000 feet and more) and ultra deep (5,000 feet and more), in part because environmentalists have succeeded in rendering the Pacific and nearly all the Atlantic coast off-limits to oil production. (President Obama's tentative, selective opening of some Atlantic and offshore Alaska sites is now dead.) And of course, in the safest of all places, on land, we've had a 30-year ban on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
So we go deep, ultra deep -- to such a technological frontier that no precedent exists for the April 20 blowout in the Gulf of Mexico.
There will always be catastrophic oil spills. You make them as rare as humanly possible, but where would you rather have one: in the Gulf of Mexico, upon which thousands depend for their livelihood, or in the Arctic, where there are practically no people? All spills seriously damage wildlife. That's a given. But why have we pushed the drilling from the barren to the populated, from the remote wilderness to a center of fishing, shipping, tourism and recreation?
Not that the environmentalists are the only ones to blame. Not by far. But it is odd that they've escaped any mention at all.
The other culprits are pretty obvious. It starts with BP, which seems not only to have had an amazing string of perfect-storm engineering lapses but no contingencies to deal with a catastrophic system failure.
However, the railing against BP for its performance since the accident is harder to understand. I attribute no virtue to BP, just self-interest. What possible interest can it have to do anything but cap the well as quickly as possible? Every day that oil is spilled means millions more in losses, cleanup and restitution.
Federal officials who rage against BP would like to deflect attention from their own role in this disaster. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, whose department's laxity in environmental permitting and safety oversight renders it among the many bearing responsibility, expresses outrage at BP's inability to stop the leak, and even threatens to "push them out of the way."
"To replace them with what?" asked the estimable, admirably candid Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander. No one has the assets and expertise of BP. The federal government can fight wars, conduct a census and hand out billions in earmarks, but it has not a clue how to cap a one-mile-deep out-of-control oil well.
Obama didn't help much with his finger-pointing Rose Garden speech in which he denounced finger-pointing, then proceeded to blame everyone but himself. Even the grace note of admitting some federal responsibility turned sour when he reflexively added that these problems have been going on "for a decade or more" -- translation: Bush did it -- while, in contrast, his own interior secretary had worked diligently to solve the problem "from the day he took office."
Really? Why hadn't we heard a thing about this? What about the September 2009 letter from Obama's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration accusing Interior's Minerals Management Service of understating the "risk and impacts" of a major oil spill? When you get a blowout 15 months into your administration, and your own Interior Department had given BP a "categorical" environmental exemption in April 2009, the buck stops.
In the end, speeches will make no difference. If BP can cap the well in time to prevent an absolute calamity in the gulf, the president will escape politically. If it doesn't -- if the gusher isn't stopped before the relief wells are completed in August -- it will become Obama's Katrina.
That will be unfair, because Obama is no more responsible for the damage caused by this than Bush was for the damage caused by Katrina. But that's the nature of American politics and its presidential cult of personality: We expect our presidents to play Superman. Helplessness, however undeniable, is no defense.
Moreover, Obama has never been overly modest about his own powers. Two years ago next week, he declared that history will mark his ascent to the presidency as the moment when "our planet began to heal" and "the rise of the oceans began to slow."
Well, when you anoint yourself King Canute, you mustn't be surprised when your subjects expect you to command the tides.
letters@charleskrauthammer.com
Shame on you BP!!!
Macadamia;1314421 wrote:
There will always be catastrophic oil spills. You make them as rare as humanly possible, but where would you rather have one: in the Gulf of Mexico, upon which thousands depend for their livelihood, or in the Arctic, where there are practically no people? All spills seriously damage wildlife. That's a given. But why have we pushed the drilling from the barren to the populated, from the remote wilderness to a center of fishing, shipping, tourism and recreation?
This wouldn't have been a complete disaster if BP had the sense to drill relief wells along side the main. That is the only complete solution to stop the leak, and it will take months at this point. This is common practice in Canada.
BP was cutting corners on safety, modifying the blowout preventer, and using salt water in place of drilling mud. They didn't meet international standards let alone U.S. safety standards.
It's pretty sad to blame the environmentalists. History will repeat itself again and again if people can't learn the simple lesson here.
There will always be catastrophic oil spills. You make them as rare as humanly possible, but where would you rather have one: in the Gulf of Mexico, upon which thousands depend for their livelihood, or in the Arctic, where there are practically no people? All spills seriously damage wildlife. That's a given. But why have we pushed the drilling from the barren to the populated, from the remote wilderness to a center of fishing, shipping, tourism and recreation?
This wouldn't have been a complete disaster if BP had the sense to drill relief wells along side the main. That is the only complete solution to stop the leak, and it will take months at this point. This is common practice in Canada.
BP was cutting corners on safety, modifying the blowout preventer, and using salt water in place of drilling mud. They didn't meet international standards let alone U.S. safety standards.
It's pretty sad to blame the environmentalists. History will repeat itself again and again if people can't learn the simple lesson here.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
Seems unfair to blame Obama. It's BP's responsibility.
Personally, I am suspicious about Halliburton's involvement (though at present they appear to be squeaky clean) because any company involving Cheney is deeply suspect (imo).
Personally, I am suspicious about Halliburton's involvement (though at present they appear to be squeaky clean) because any company involving Cheney is deeply suspect (imo).
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Shame on you BP!!!
You know, the Iranians had decades of Western oil companies pumping spew like that into their living space, until they refused to take it any longer. In the Middle East in general it's fine to pollute but not when it's in home waters? Arabs don't matter but if it's going to reduce the seafood supply to New Orleans it's an outrage and oh, don't forget the god-given right of Capitalism to consume everything plus ten percent?
This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.
Strive for a little perspective, eh?
This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.
Strive for a little perspective, eh?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Shame on you BP!!!
spot;1314460 wrote: You know, the Iranians had decades of Western oil companies pumping spew like that into their living space, until they refused to take it any longer. In the Middle East in general it's fine to pollute but not when it's in home waters? Arabs don't matter but if it's going to reduce the seafood supply to New Orleans it's an outrage and oh, don't forget the god-given right of Capitalism to consume everything plus ten percent?
This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.
Strive for a little perspective, eh?
Looks like I'm gonna have to borrow Nomad's brillo pad
This trivial event - this utterly minor environmental event which just happens to be costing a few fisherman their livelihoods - is sharing the news this week with the Bhopal disaster in which a US corporation, Union Carbide, accidentally spilled so much toxin that around ten thousand Indian townspeople died of it in the days that followed and another hundred thousand had their health screwed for the rest of their lives. One's an environmental incident, the other's an environmental disaster. One's got Americans screaming for compensation (and, not surprisingly, vengeance) and the other ain't nothing to do with us folks, no sirree and hell they'd prob'ly have died anyway, it's almost as filthy and backward a country as Afghanistan.
Strive for a little perspective, eh?
Looks like I'm gonna have to borrow Nomad's brillo pad
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Shame on you BP!!!
I'd forgotten about Union Carbide. An interesting contrast...
Mind you, I'd be pretty livid if this was going on off the Cornish coast because a US company had b*ggered up. (Torrey Canyon ringing a bell here somewhere...) I suppose BP can use the same compensation method as Union Carbide?
Mind you, I'd be pretty livid if this was going on off the Cornish coast because a US company had b*ggered up. (Torrey Canyon ringing a bell here somewhere...) I suppose BP can use the same compensation method as Union Carbide?
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Shame on you BP!!!
British Petroleum, who had rebranded themselves as Beyond Petroleum, in an effort to show they where concerned about the environment will forever be thought of as one of the dirtiest corporate polluters in the world. The disaster has occurred in a region where millions live, billions of dollars are made in fishing and tourism, and where sensitive ecological wet lands are located. The government witch hunt is on. BP's CEO says he wants his life back. It won't be long - maybe a few years from now. I'm guessing the demise of BP is not far away. Maybe, ironically, they will be bought out by Exxon.