Democrat Honesty and the BP Oil Spill

2. Since when did we start putting a price tag on control and cleanup from disasters of this magnitude?

3. If it is about the money why are so many of the thousands of volunteer help by the locals been turned down?[/QUOTE]

Thanks, the articles you referenced are reciting claims made by Republican politicians and which have been refuted (per the article) by the national incident commander (Admiral Thad Allen) and the White House.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs on Thursday scorned the idea that "somehow it took the command 70 days to accept international help."

"That is a myth," he declared, "that has been debunked literally hundreds of times."

So what your articles boil down to is a he said/she said case. There are a lot of accusations, but no proofs.

And the Republicans do not have a very good record of truth telling. Remember, these are the same Republicans you came up with the Death Panels and other abusurd accusations just a few months ago in respect to healthcare.

I won't say that there have not been screwup. I think it is highly likely that there have been some screwups. I have never seen any large scale operation go off without a few screwups. Because people are prone to screwup. But I still see no evidence of widespread screwups as Republicans and their agents are trying to make everyone believe.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Read fine. What exactly to you think you've "proved"? - do you really believe that the DHS was a suggestion of Dopey Joe's?

Or, on the flip side, that Old Joe was part of the opposition to W&Co's agenda?

I think maybe you do. I think you swallowed that utterly absurd notion whole, and that you really believe Joe Lieberman was instrumental in the inspiration, design, and creation of the DHS, as a representative of a political faction unfriendly to the White House, one that was forcing the thing on an unwilling W&Co.

And you expect the rest of us to take that seriously.

Meanwhile: the deepwater drilling oversight - Joe Lieberman running that show too? Cheney an unwilling, reluctant agent coerced into giving the oil companies a free hand and a bunch of tax and tariff breaks, unfairly blamed for the disastrous consequences of incompetent executive branch arrangements he would have arranged otherwise otherwise?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why yes I did. The question is did you? And the answer is apparently not. Because you have still failed to address the issue raised in the article.

Truth hurts you doesn't it?

Ah yes, back to the old personal attack. When your arguements and positions are bereft of fact and reason...which is often...then you go to the ad hominem which is an error of logic.

Governor Barbour is a Republican partisan. His job is to get Republican candidates elected to office this fall. And you want to use him as proof of the many wild ass unsupported claims he and other Republican partisans have been making. That is just stupid, I am sorry. But it is just stupid.

Barbour is not credible. And you still have failed to produce a single thread of proof other than Barbour or some other partisan said so.

And as for your smell test, maybe you should get your smeller checked and do some research. Because Barbour has failed to use all of the resources President Obama has provided him to use on the Gulf oil spill...only activating 57 of the 6000 individuals authorized by President Obama.

This article is dated June, if that makes your smeller any better.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/25/gov-bobby-jindal-still-ha_n_626175.html

And the authorities, Adminral Thad Allen and the White House have denied the claims made by Barbour and other partisans. So who do I want to believe, the guys you have been blowing smoke up the rears of people for decades or those that have yet to blow smoke? It is not a hard choice for any unbiased observer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well said Ice.

 

If you bothered to read either of the links I posted you will see that OHS was not intended to be cabinet and dept. level and it morphed into DHS and became so only after Congress pushed Bush to do so. Does Bush have no responsibility for the behemoth of DHS? Of course not. He created it. But the actual sequence of events is far different than the one you laid out, and your bullshit conspiracy theories about this and other national security acts laying in waiting is just that, a bullshit conspiracy theory, and one which you have NO proof of.

No, Ice. I expect nothing from you but your usual, and I've gotten that. And frankly, I don't even really to care to interact with you. You're intellectually useless and boring and you operate the same way and say the same things time and again (like repeating your bullshit theory here, in this thread). One wonders if it is possible for you to discuss anything at all without, at some point, lobbing Bush or Cheney's name into the discussion. But again, I don't care. Have at it. I've largely left this site because people like you just aren't worth the powder. And never will be.

Congress has oversight. They failed to exercise it. That should not surprise anyone with half a brain. Congress, regardless of who is in control, routinely fails in its oversight role.

This has nothing to do with Cheney, despite your lame attempts to rant and rave and make it so.

 

So?

Making it accountable and getting some control over it was a goal of some - a few - Dems. Making it all-powerful was a goal of more than a few Reps, the entire Executive branch (Reps), and many Dems as well. Voila.

It didn't "morph" on its own. W&Co morphed it.

Promulgation of specific regs and policies, day to day oversight and enforcement of regs, and all that stuff, is Executive Branch responsibility.

The Congress that failed to establish appropriate backing legislation, etc, was the Congress we have been enjoying since '94.

Oil drilling policy and oil industry regulation in the Gulf of Mexico has nothing to do with Richard Cheney, ex-CEO of major drilling contractor Halliburton, VP of the US, the government's main man on dealing with the oil industry issues after Katrina, the holder of numerous high level conferences and meetings with all the major oil industry powers in the first two years of W's administration,

so saith Countzero.

 

What don't you understand that under the law they are already accountable?

BP has accepted the Blame, BP has not denied that it is their Fault, and it is incumbent on them to mitigate the results.

Obama's grandstanding is exactly that Grandstanding ,it accomplishes nothing.

BP had already spent far more than is legally required in the control and clean up efforts, than was legally required of them.

Lets stop the leak first, stop the environmental damage first, get the situation under control and then we have all the time in the world to assign blame, and get Obama's and your 10 pounds of flesh.

iceaura, guess what the 103 Congress, in 1994 was controlled by the Democrats, and it has been controlled by the Democrats since 2007, and will be at least until 2010, so why didn't your Democrat supermen do something to prevent this disaster?

It seem that the MMS under the Democrats were giving Deepwater Horizon safety awards, and feting them to banquets.

When the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, was passed in 1986 it was a Bipartisan Bill, not only did both parties support the legislation, the House was controlled by the Democrats and the Senate was controlled by the Republican.....so if there is blame for one there is blame for the other.

 

You are right in that Republicans and Democrats both have blood on their hands when it comes to the influence of oil companies. It was a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president who placed a cap on oil company liability.

And Democrats when they had the opportunity did not make needed changes in regulation and neither did Republicans. But there is no parity of guilt as you seem to think. Administration of MM was deplorable under the george II administration. And Republicans have reaped huge sums from the oil industry...collecting 4 dollars for every one given to Democrats.

And you above most others, having been a career federal employee, know that changing an organization (much less a federal organization) is not easy or swift. I think you wittnessed a huge change in the Army after Vietnam. It did not happen quickly or efficiently. It took time.

So it is unrealistic to expect the Obama administration to effect serious change in only a matter of months. And I think if you are being honest with yourself, you know that too.

 

Republicans don't want to admit the valid criticism of BP because it reveals the full extent and danger of corporate power! To correct it would be against their platform.

 

oh it figures he would be on the dole... prolly a double dipper who won't get the fuck out either

 

So you recognize that the Democrats are at fault.

And Democrats when they had the opportunity did not make needed changes in regulation

Guess what, the changes in the Military after Vietnam were swift and deep, man power cuts, equipment cuts, readiness cuts, budget cuts, and they were not years in the making, and we are still paying for those cuts today, exacerbated by Clintons military cuts for the Peace Dividend, at the end of the Cold War.

17 months was not a matter of months, you have expounded in loud and clear manner that you expected George to do better in 11 months.

Now as for the $4 to $1, I can't help it the Democrats prostitute themselves so cheaply, it was apparently enough to keep the Democrats from changing a thing in the MMS.

 

So Buffalo has suddenly become a critic of corporate influence in government? Oh how the mighty have fallen.

 

Let's be clear here. I said that both parties have been soft on the oil industry. However, I also said that no parity exists between the two parties. At least Democrats have had presidents who encouraged and enforced industry regulation in addition to leading and supporting initatitves that would have made the country more energy independent, case in point Jimmy Carter. Carter made a number of changes which if pursued would have led us to a much better place today in terms of energy independence. However, his Republican successor systematicly set about reversing all of Carters energy initatitives.

So while Democrats in Congress have been complicit with their Republican collegues at times. They have on occassion pursued energy independence and policies that favored the average Joe or Jane citizen at the expense of big oil interests. Republicans have never accepted the average Joe or Jane position when opposed to big oil.

LOL, those peskly little details keep them files in your soup.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The period of time you refernced in this paragraph spans the course of 25 years. And I was not referring to cuts in military budgets which were proposed by Republicans as well as Democrats. Because the cold war had ended. So there was no need to fund such a large standing military.

My reference was the transformation of the US Army from the incompetent force it was in Vietnam to the force it is today. That transformation took decades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army#20th_century

"The Vietnam War is often regarded as a low point in the Army's record"

"The 1980s was mostly a decade of reorganization. The Army converted to an all-volunteer force with greater emphasis on training and technology."

The bottom line, it took the US Army a long time to improve quality in the Army. The other services were not dependent on conscription to fill their ranks as was the Army.

LOL, so Republicans are much better at prostituting themselves? Well I will agree with you on that one.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What you are forgetting is that the approval of Deep Horizon occured long before the current 17 months in office. My guesss is that the Deep Horizon permits were issued shortly after President Obama assumed office or shortly thereafter. Obama did replace the leadership of those organizations. But the leadership did not move swift enough and the leadership of MM has again been replaced.

As for george II , he had eight years, two terms, and did nothing. So there is no excuse for george II.

 

What's the name of this mental disorder?

And why do these guys have so much trouble with simple facts? They can't count to fifty, they can't remember or recognize the simplest and most famous pf basic circumstances, they have the attention span of a fruit fly when following a sequence of events - this is the personal gone political with a vengeance, as a major force in US politics.

We have plenty of lawyers and policemen and judges not currently involved in stopping the leak - unlike what the right seems to expect from bureaucrats, based on its own supply of them, lefties expect government agencies to function even if there is a fire or explosion or hurricane or oil leak somewhere. And if the Regent University grads can't handle a major criminal prosecution because there's tar on their favorite beach, and can only focus their minds on their jobs when the TV is showing them peaceful things and no problems, they should be replaced with more competent and professional employees.

We can't put the entire legal operation of the Federal government on hold until this blowout has run its course, and the environment is clean again - for one thing, that could take years.

 

iceaura;

And BP hasn't stopped spending even though they have exceeded the liability cap, so what don't you understand about it.

Now what don't you understand that the vast majority of lawyers and policemen and judges, have no jurisdiction, it is Federal waters so nice try for a Red Herring.

And it is you who can't count to 50, the Democrats have controlled Congress since 2007, just count the seats, and now also control the Presidency, for over a year, and I find it interesting that the Blow out happened under Obama's watch Obama the largest recipient of BP of BP largess in Congress and the Election, in fact Obama has been the largest recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, so what did BP buy with the money?

Safety Awards, and no real inspections once Obama was the POTUS?

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64420A20100505

Yes iceaura, count to 50, and it is still there, the Democrats in Control of Congress since 2007, Obama, largest recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, and the Well still gushing, and Obama and the Federals still haven't implemented the Gulf Oil Disaster Plan.

 

Wait, are you complaining that Obama isn't liberal enough? That his lapse of attention to oil drilling regulations, which resembles the attitudes of Republicans, is wrong?
Maybe Rush Limbaugh can plug the leak with his fat head.