The problem was insufficient safety standards and insufficient government regulation before the spill started. Once the spill started, there is very little that the government can do other than to keep the pressure on to BP to fix it. The government does not have the equipment to fix the leak themselves, unless they steal it from private corporations. I know that some people say we should trust BP to do the right thing. Would you like to buy a nice bridge from me, too?

I can appreciate criticism of "the government" for allowing lax standards. I don't appreciate criticism of "the government" for "not doing anything" after the accident. As far as I know, BP is the expert in capping oil wells 5000 ft. under -- if they can't do it, I don't expect the President to know how to do it. If this happened to another company, they would probably hire BP to try to fix it. At the moment, we are in a period of denial, when we think if we keep drilling for oil, it will stay at $3.00/gallon. It won't, regardless of whether or not there is a Republican, a Democrat, or a (Tea) Partier in charge. We need to start moving off oil now, so that in 20 years, when we can't afford to drive gasoline-based vehicles, it won't matter because we will already be driving electric vehicles. That day is coming within the lifetime of the vehicles we are purchasing today.

Paul, Were you so generous when Katrina hit New Orleans? Remember, that was when the levies, built by the federal government, failed. Even Brownie would be givng the green light to Gov. Jindel to build sand berms all over the place. Seems that Obama doesn't want to offend his greenies...to hell with Louisianna estuaries. Salazar was NOT on the job from day one...he spent the first three days on vacation, ignoring the issue. Once the well blew, it should have obvious that this was going to be a big deal. Every possible mitigation should have been authroized on day two. It was not, and it still is not being done. Paul, you are in the tank for Obama.

Gavin, Are you saying that the President should have known that BP was incorrect in its evaluation of how much oil was leaking? As for Presidents (Republican or Democrat) visiting disasters, I never quite got the psychology of it myself. Certainly since WWII, we don't really want the president wandering around any real hazards, so, ... mainly it is a photo-op.

Anon, It was known from the beginning that a lot of oil was spewing. If it was 5,000 bbl per day or 20,000, the response should have been to throw EVERY mitigation at at it from day two. Even now, the sand berms are not being approved at large scale. Containment booms should have been leased and borrowed from every friendly country and company...even unfriendly ones. Dispersants, even if slightly toxic should be given the green light, as the best of poor choices. The greenies should be told by Obama, politely, to shut up...but that might cost him some votes, eh? Pathetic. I agree with your second statement about photo ops. That is why Bush did not not stop on the ground in New Orleans...he did a simple fly over on the return to Washington from his ranch in Texas. Look where that got him! Brownie had his resources prepositioned and out of harms way. Obama and his boys had/have neither. Obama is dithering and making political speeches. He should be issuing executive emergency directives to mobilize the cleanup and mitigation...but that would take actual leadership. If he cannot do it, he should appoint Gov. Jindel to take charge.

Gavin, I was in Dallas last week, and ate lunch with 3 women from New Orleans who were attending the same meeting I was there for. They stated that the current N.O. Mayor, the LA Republican Governor, and the federal officials are much more engaged in this current disaster than was the case with their predecessors when Katrina hit. I take them at their word about that. I am no apologist for any politician or elected official. This matter goes beyond politics. I will make this observation?I did not perceive the GW Bush Administration taking a pro-active approach to dealing with the Hurricane Katrina disaster. That contrasts with what the GHW Bush Administration did when Hurricane Andrew hit Florida in 1991 and we had that little earthquake in this part of the world in 1989. This oil thing is a different and more pernicious matter. It is clear that man-made equipment failed to perform, people were killed as a result, and the follow on consequences from the oil coming out of that drilled well have killed and will kill numerous wildlife and many people?s livelihoods. And even with pro-active approaches by all concerned, getting this one fixed is much more difficult than hurricanes and earthquakes. I thought Obama did a pretty poor job in the press conference yesterday. He was defensive, and allowed some of the press to push his buttons about this thing. And I also think he is in the same boat as are others responsible for getting this thing fixed: they are flying blind, and truly do not know how to fix this problem.

"I did not perceive the GW Bush Administration taking a pro-active approach to dealing with the Hurricane Katrina disaster." GWB had his emergency people tell LA and New Orleans to evacuate. They dithered. Katrina as a massive and widespread disaster. It was impossbile to even ap proach some of the disaster zones for days. Your perceptions, Paul, seem to be controlled by Geraldo Rivera and his camera at the Superdome. Brownie didn't have the time or opportunity to watch Geraldo, becasue he was dealing with more more than just New Orleans. This massive oil spill is STILL not being dealt with with appropriate urgency by Obama. Jindel and some other LA politicians understand the urgency, and are acting on their own, becasue the federal government is taking a political approach rather than throwing everything at the problem. It is a little perplexing to me that you cannot percieve what is really happening, Paul. You are, indeed, in the tank for Obama, and you are making excuses for him.

Gavin, I vividly remember driving back to the Bay Area from Spokane the weekend before Katrina hit NO. Listening to the news on the car radio as the storm approached. The President was at his ranch. It was quite apparent from the news reports that this was a major storm. The President stayed at his ranch in Texas. This current crisis has no heroes, as I stated up front. Nobody has a clue what to do, and that is the problem. Please tell me what "excuses" I am making for anybody. I could insert BP in place of Obama in your assertions and they would sound the same.

"I could insert BP in place of Obama in your assertions and they would sound the same." BP cannot overide environmental rules to allow Jindel and other local leaders to call in every bulldozer and dredge they can find to start building sand berms. Only Obama can do this. He is dithering and worrying about how his environmental left will feel about disturbing the sand. Bush's people made dire warnings to the mayor of New Orleans to evacuate. The mayor dithered until the last moment. The governor of LA needed to request various federal help, but she failed to do so. I don't care for Bownie's personality, but he did his job, given the circumstances. Katrina was a much tougher problem than this oil leak. "The President stayed at his ranch in Texas". His ranch was his working White House. Do you think he should have flown into the approaching hurricane? Has Obama ordered every available deep water drilling rig in the Gulf to the site to start drilling relief wells, even though they might not be BP rigs? Has he discussed the possibility of low yield atomic bombs to stop the flow (as has been used by the Russians in the past)? If he hasn't done these two things, he is not serious about treating this as the disaster that his political speeches claim it is.

Prince William Sound is 55 square miles in area. The Gulf of Mexico is 615,000 square miles. The world did not come to an end when the drilling ship went down, nor when the oil spewed. It is unlikely that more than 10% of the Gulf wildlife will die, not unusual in nature. Big numbers, but it's a big world.

Gavin, I'm confused. Do you think this is a (national level) crisis? When did it become so? In the early days, BP, the experts at deep-sea drilling, were implying that there was little to worry about at that stage, that the leak was small, etc. Now, it seems, the leak is large -- but, unusual. At this depth, much of the oil is dispersing, and the more volatile components dissolving. Relatively little of the usual tarry stuff is emerging at the surface -- this is what is reaching some of the beaches and marshes. The impact on the ecosystem of the tar is well known. The impact of the much larger, but, dispersing material is unknown. I'm always surprised by how many experts there are on these esoteric subjects...

"we understood from day one the potential enormity of this crisis and acted accordingly." (President Obama). I am tired of all this "day one" political crap. It's going on six weeks now, and he is still dithering. The Coast Guard was estimating 8,000 bbl per day at day 4. That's enough to do some serious damage over time. Softball sized tar balls are being found on the beaches, as well as smaller stuff. Sand berms can stop the stuff from getting into the estuaries...but where are they? Is it a national tragedy? Probably not, although many can also argue that 9-11 wasn't a national attack/tragedy, becasue it did not kill them. Some things affect the national psyche, and this oil spill is one of them. I think most of us can feel for the people and wildlife in the Gulf. If this incident causes a political backlash against offshore drilling, there will be a national disaster.

Why all the complaints about government response? Because, where the rubber meets the road, everyone is a socialist: "To each according to his needs (wants)."

It is likely that the best response of government here was to not get in the way of the workers. The best place for executives during emergencies is at their crisis desks.

Our President is not responsible for industrial accidents. Giving Obama this responsibility is to buy into his usurpation of every aspect of running the country and our lives.

Obama got a lot of flak on a radio talk show for his appearance on TV. You say he looked exhausted. When listening to the news conference all the way through, and the video is posted on the White House website, I can see why any President would want to avoid the media. Instead of asking questions and ascertaining new facts these arrogant pompous so-called journalists use every trick in the book to inject underhanded spin and put themselves in the story. I was indignant when President Bush II banished Helen Thomas from the press room ... but yesterday in the middle of the conference about the Gulf Oil Well spill she started badgering the President about Afghanistan. Maybe it's time for her to go live in an old folks home, what a waste of time. Correspondents asking the President over, twice, are you sure? What kind of idiots are these, and why does the President and the nation put up with this, Instead of information we get distraction and emotional BS. If we want to fix the many things that are broken with our country, one of the first ones should be the channels that inform the public. That news conference was a disgrace, elementary school kids could have asked better questions. Finally, I don't know why President Obama humors these fools, other than if he does not they all will turn on him. The press and media corp is a disgrace to their profession.

The predictable and repetitive voices of the right wing here talking about how there is no role for the government and the a 10% die off is just too bad are wrong now, they were wrong when Bush was President, and they have been wrong since corporate concerns have gotten big enough to where one mistake can cause a disaster like this, It is unacceptable that any body, government, corporate or otherwise takes the right or thinks it has the right to make blind risks of the planetary inheritance that belongs to every human being on Earth. I have been all over the Gulf coast and it is a huge, beautiful and amazing place that no one has the right to risk, and now that the consequences of these risks are both so profitable for those involved in resource exploitation, and the so dire when there is a problem we have moved into a era where the blind echoing of what has gone on before and disregard for other points of views is unacceptable.

Gavin: > GWB had his emergency people tell LA and New Orleans to evacuate. You called that "proactive"? NO, proactive would have been to fix the levees before a catastrophe, not wait for one and tell everyone to evacuate.

"You called that "proactive"? NO, proactive would have been to fix the levees before a catastrophe" Anon, If GWB was really proactive, he would have stopped the hurricane, too. The levees in New Orleans are a good example of how socialism is a failure. They were built by the federal government. The Army Corps of Engineers also destroyed the natural barriers to hurricane penetration to N.O. Big government and big corporations can do bad things, but I get much more benefit from big corporations. Quit whining about the press...it treated Reagan and GWB MUCH worse than it is currently treating Obama. In fact, the press was and still is supporting Obama.

Good God Almighty: When will Bush bashing stop? To set the record straight for the millionth time: 1)The repair of Levies was funded by Feds for years..but never done because of local corruption. I lived there..always a big "hurrah" when money was granted to fix the levies..odd..they never got fixed. Not gonna waste my time re-looking up the the data of many millions of dollars. Corruption in govt? What a shock. Taking money meant for one purpose and usurping it for others? Stunning. 2) The Feds and the National Guard were ready to roll from BEFORE the levies broke..the Governor of Lousiana and the Mayor of New Orleans both declined the offers of help. They had that right..they take the responsibility. Blah blah blah. Doesn't matter, really, the story line is set and no facts will ever interfere with the uninformed opinions. As for BP and oil spill. The responsibility of Feds is to protect our borders, be it from oil spills or illegal immigrants, attacks from without or within. There has been a massive failure of these Feds to protect the southern coasts..why? Could it be some kind of -ism? Lousiana begged for berms..but the FEds, unlike the "last crisis" in the Southern Gulf, were not standing ready to help, but "in meetings" with no-nothings who have done nothing, while spending time joining Mexico's Pres in whipping Arizona for a law based on Fed law ( passed because of repeated multi-POTUS neglect of border protection). One COULD almost get paranoid and think that there is some kind of grand political plan at work to use this as a way of stirring up anti-oil drilling fervor, a way to bring on new taxes on oil, and a way to move ever closer to more nationalization/regulation of oil companies. Oh yes..already happened. Too busy thinking up ways to exploit this for political gain to actually respond to States crying for help. Just follow Chavez's lead, and we will turn ever more into Venezuela. Wow..Great job Mr. President, protecting us yet again.

If you look back at the news articles, the first report of the Feds showing up in the gulf was described as a couple of Federal officials accompanied by a group of government lawyers. Who really thinks that an appropriate first response starts with transporting lawyers to begin waving swords? If Bush had done that there would be a firestorm of criticism from every major media player. How much golf and basketball do you think Obama has participated in since the beginning of this incident?

>> Anon, If GWB was really proactive, he would have stopped the hurricane, too. Gavin, I'll accept that ridiculous statement as a your best effort to avoid silly, even though I don't think it worked. MIke, most wars these days are fought with lawyers. The biggest war going on in our land is about regulation and it touches on everything important that we hear in the media. No matter what the Obama administration does they are going to get bombarded with silliness and neverending blame. Rebranding everything that goes wrong in the country now as "Obama's" WHATEVER is proof enough of that. The bailout was unable to claw back CEO pay and bonuses for some of the worst criminals in the country ... I'd say lawyers are right there on the front lines. I don't know about you but having a President sit around an not exercise of get some recreation is not comforting to me, and golf and basketball is not worthy of insult in my book. I count these arguments are silly and irrelevant.

Day 41. Still blocking the sand berms.

Gavin, any ideas WHY this Admin is blocking useful, practical, easy to do solutions for "self-defense"? Payback for not supporting "him"? Payback for being "southern"? Creating useful propoganda against oil as the coastlines and jobs get wrecked? Whatsup?

The berms are not being built, because Obama refuses to issue emergency decrees that will override environmental restrictions on sand removal from federal waters. He dare not go against his environmental left...that might cost him votes. Day 41. It's beginning to feel like the Iranian hostage issue with Carter.

oh..had no clue. In the absence of a reasons that make sense, I could only find nefarious reasons. What you say makes sense. The far left environmentalists are so short sighted, I can see that they would rather destroy the coastline and jobs than allow the shifting of some sands.. typical

Anon, disprove my 10% assertion. Compare the wildlife loss from this spill and that from any large volcano eruption. Energy makes life possible, and if it entails costs, doesn't everything? The ill concealed hatred of capitalism demonstrated here causes me to ask how else could the cost of giant works be accumulated?

Anon, My point which you apparently missed, is that for some reason it's OK for Obama to golf and play basketball and fly AF 1 to distant places for date nights, but GWB caught unending flack for long runs and riding his mountain bike as if every moment doing so could have been better spent. Every exec worth their salt knows that exercise promotes the ability to focus on work issues better than 18 hour days and no exercise. The question is why is this understood for Obama but was not for Bush? The hypocrisy on the left and in the media makes all their arguments suspect.

Good points, Mr. Wallis. Imagine the tremendous destruction of sensitive habitats that the latest Volcano in ..was it Iceland?..has caused, let alone the asthma/illnesses of humans and the tremendous cost in business cancellations. Perspective is useful

One thing I am sure of - our recovery from any disaster is facilitated if we don't expend all our capital, both real and political, on gotcha. There will be plenty of time to establish blame, but screaming imprecations at the company during the process will force them to spend more on lawyers and less on engineers.

"The levees in New Orleans are a good example of how socialism is a failure. They were built by the federal government. The Army Corps of Engineers also destroyed the natural barriers to hurricane penetration to N.O. Big government and big corporations can do bad things, but I get much more benefit from big corporations." People felt just the opposite when the ACE was building these things. Only those environmental swamp-hugging extremists opposed them. "Compare the wildlife loss from this spill and that from any large volcano eruption. Energy makes life possible, and if it entails costs, doesn't everything?" Kill, baby, kill.

Paul, when the smoke clears away I want that preventer hauled into a court of law, and I want the folks responsible for the preventer's failure to prevent brought to justice. Then I want redundant redundancy in the next preventers. Acknowledgment does not constitute approval, Paul.

"Acknowledgment does not constitute approval, Paul." I was merely acknowledging your acknowledgement with a pithy precis. Regarding the BOP, you got half the story right. Its manufactorer and operator need a hard grilling, a big bill, and possibly jail time. But the thing IS redundant - I count 3 rams and 2 annulars. What's your tally?

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

"The world did not come to an end when the drilling ship went down, nor when the oil spewed. It is unlikely that more than 10% of the Gulf wildlife will die, not unusual in nature. Big numbers, but it's a big world." Yea, since WWII didn't kill more than 10% of humans, that was no big deal either, eh Walt?

Apparently, in Canada, every time an offshore oil well is drilled, it is required by regulations that a relief well be drilled at the same time as the main well just in case of an accident like this. Wby is it that all developed nations on earth, including Canada, have such safeguards, and not the US??? We seem to be such a backwards country at times.

Redundant redundancy requires totally independent systems. Paul, people deaths are on a different scale than animal deaths.

A relief well is just as subject to blowout as the main well.

"Redundant redundancy requires totally independent systems." You have obviously never spent any time in the oilpatch. All rams on a BOP are independently actuatable, as are the annulars. Either all the controls failed, or BritPet used an underrated BOP to save a few $k. "Paul, people deaths are on a different scale than animal deaths." People and animals have been on different scales for a long time. For example, Americans spend far more on pet food than on relief for sick children. But just what is the relevance of your remark in this thread? "A relief well is just as subject to blowout as the main well." Now you're making sense. Also, reliefs are drilled in much greater haste and on tighter budgets than revenue holes. BP may drain that whole reservoir yet, and not a drop ever goes into any SUV's gas tank in Peoria. Mission bungled.

So there is no central control on the assembly, no node through all signals pass, no single power supply? Where can I get diagrams of this wonder of engineering?

"So there is no central control on the assembly..." If you're wondering why they didn't build in a single point of failure to counteract rudundancy, ask the manufacturer. Or maybe they do that on their bargain basement models, and this was one of them.

Day 43. James Cameron, the Hollwood director, was just brought in to consult on a solution. Image is everything. Still no permission to build the sand berms. Since Obama continues to claim that he is doing everything possible, has he had serious discussions with Livermore Labs to determine the correct yield of a nuclear device to be used to shut off the flow?

We need all domestic sources of oil in this case. Drill deep and have a more advance tech for risk management, if BP had 2 separate outlets for the well they could have prevented this and saved $1b so far Meanwhile build those sand beams.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Day 44. Gov. Jindal just held a press conference where he demanded federal action to force BP to pay for sand berms. He said his state will do the job for less than one-third the cost that BP estimates. Most importantly, he will start immediately. Obama still says "no", we must study the issue. It is time to put Jindal in charge of this entire mess. He is the only one with the leadership skills to get the job done. It should be remembered that the federal government gets very significant royalties from the federal oil leases. It is not as culpable as BP, but it definitely shares in the responsibility. It is way past time for Obama to hand over the reins to Jindal.

Oh, now Bobby Jindal wants the government to step in with federal action. Didn't Bobby Jindal turn down stimulus money because he did not want the federal government interfering with his state? So when it is convenient Jindal and other Republicans/Tea Party people want government action

Here is what the spill would look like if it were centered in SF Web Link You can move it around the country, or the world

Awww, c'mon editor. Did you have to remove my entire posting because part of it criticized Israel? For posterity, here's the non-Israel part, as I can reconstruct it. "Since Obama continues to claim that he is doing everything possible, has he had serious discussions with Livermore Labs to determine the correct yield of a nuclear device to be used to shut off the flow?" Easy answer: zero. That is, unless you intend to preclude any possibility of control and drain the whole reservoir into the Gulf. Terrorists would love to put a nuke on that spot right now.

"Oh, now Bobby Jindal wants the government to step in " It's federal waters that this oil spill is located in. The federal government gets major royalties from the leases. Jindal wants the federal government to require BP to write the check. The federal government has already failed in its responsibility, so Jindal wants them to get out of the way...he will lead the effort himself. I am simply saying that Jindal should be put in charge of the entire effort, not just the sand berms. He has what it takes, and Obama clearly does not.

"I am simply saying that Jindal should be put in charge of the entire effort, not just the sand berms. He has what it takes, and Obama clearly does not." Well, if empty noisy rhetoric is what it takes, then Jindal has a clear advantage over Obama.

Hmm...let us remember a few things 1) Who makes the most profit from Oil? If you think Oil companies, wrong..it is our Federal govt. It makes more than the Oil companies do in profit from the taxes levied on the oil. Ok.. 2) Put this oil spill in perspective: Saddam's deliberate oil sabotage 1991-1992: 500,000,000 gallons Gulf of Mexico Rig spill 1979: 140,000,000 gallons 3) This spill so far: assuming 15,000 BARRELS per day, ( not gallons), 25,000,000 gallons. Why the big panic? Yes, dead animals...yes, lost jobs ( I assume..who knows?)....but what is different? ...Now, as in Valdez ( 10-15,000,000 gallons), there is and was a HUGE left wing anti-oil propoganda attempt. No acknowledgement of what has been much worse, and how it was "cleaned up" fairly naturally, no acknowledgement of the amount of natural oil "leakage" into the ocean there is per year, no acknowledgement of the agenda of "govt takeover" being the elephant in the room dream of the left ( Rosie ODonnel typifies this..today asking why "Obama doesn't just nationalize Oil?"..geez..never thought I would live to see the day of Chavez/Castro/Mao wishes on TV) So, I am not buying into the whole "the sky is falling" routine any more.

Jindal has a practical and straightforward way to help save his state's estuaries. Obama wants to study it to death. Obama is about metrics. Metrics are necessary, but not sufficient. Firm decision making and cutting to the chase is also required. Jindal can handle both. Re nuclear devices: That conversation absoultely needs to be happening. It may be a last choice, but it needs to be on the list. The Russians have successfully used in in gas well blowouts. Obama appears to think it is bad politics, becasue he fears a backlash from the anti-nuclear crowd. The comment about it being a terroist's dream is ridiculous on its face.

BP has a history of cutting corners, unfortunately. The current crisis in the Eastern Mediterranean could however cause very real problems for our energy supplies, much beyond the leak. Turkey is a member of NATO, any attack on NATO territory requires a defensive attack by all NATO members against the attacker, Turkey claims its sovereign territory, its ship in international waters, has been attacked and its citizens killed. The oil states in the region support Turkeys position as do the majority of NATO members-- this could get very ugly, very fast. While we get less of our oil from that region than we did did in the 70, 80s we still get a great deal-- this supply is now in peril by the action of one of our percieved vassal states.

"The comment about it being a terroist's dream is ridiculous on its face." etc., etc. Goodness. So much misinformation. Where does one start? Well, wny not with nukes. Everybody loves a firecracker, and nukes are the biggest firecrackers of all. So wny not just nuke it? A terrorist would love to do that for (to) you, because if the process goofs like everything else they've tried out there has, it will mung up the hole beyond any hope of recovery. If it shatters the formation instead of seals, the whole ocean floor will be dotted with oil geysers. At least the oilpatch knows relief wells work, even if they are slow and unspectacular. You got to drill a well-aimed hole big enough to hold a nuclear device anyway, and plant the thing in the right place in the formation (fingers crossed), so why go to the trouble and uncertainty of setting up a nuke when you can just finish the hole as a relief? Do you have any idea how long it takes to set up a nuke in a borehole? Information is certain top kill for empty rhetoric. And do you seriously propose to trust those proven bumblers with a nuke, anyway? Speaking of rhetoric: Jindal. As I said in my original post on this thread, when rubber meets road everybody wants socialism. Jindal knows that and is promising a bunch more nanny socialism than Obama. Even Tea Party types eat that kind of talk up. But why doesn't he just go ahead and deliver? He's governor, right? Because socialism takes money, and what's Jindal's pocketbook like these days? Yep, zilch. All boat, no shrimp. No nukes, either. Some people are satisfied with empty rhetoric, but I prefer reality. It's the hard road, but some of us can deal with it. Now a real conservative would shove the government out of the picture and duke it out with BP toe to toe. But real conservatives are in very short supply these days.

So, aside from James Cameron, director/producer of the Titanic ( does anyone else sense the irony here?), who else is on Obama's great committee to study this problem? Any practical solutions yet? Any berms up yet? Or is it now too late? Gotta love the take charge leadership of this White House. Thankfully he wasn't in charge during Katrina. Or 9/11. He is handling this in the same way his predecessor in spirit, Carter, would have handled this,though ( remember the Iran Hostage era?)

Paul, please look up what socialism is and try to understand the difference between a legitimate function of government to protect the people ( from attacks internally and externally, from people or oil) and the illegitimate socialist function( slide into communist with enough power) desire to spread the wealth and control enterprises. All tax funded endeavors are not socialism. It is not that nuanced. Simple test to help folks understand when something is socialism (communism in some forms) and when it isn't...simply ask yourself "Is this taking from some folks and giving what they earned to those who didn't earn it? Yes? Socialism. Is this tax-paid employees, elected or not, taking over the running of a business? Communism. Is this using taxes to protect all citizens equally, those who pay taxes and those who don't? Legitimate, USA constitutional, form of government" Calling on tax funds to protect ALL the people is not socialism. Socialism is calling on taxes from the taxpayers to give to the non-taxpayers. Communism is taking over enterprises. ( as in Rosie ODonnel's question of why Obama doesn't simply nationalize the oil?)

"Paul, please look up what socialism is ..." Socialism gets redefined flexibly and amazingly rapidly to suit the definers' view of the moment. I prefer Karl Marx's eternal version (annotated here for relevancy): From each according to his ability [to pay the needed - shudder - taxes], to each according to his [perceived] need [du jour]. Of course, conservatives prefer to borrow the money instead of paying taxes, even as they grandstand against public debt out of the other side of their mouths. In this case, erstwhile conservatives want the government to borrow whatever it takes to establish nanny socialism along the GOM because they have rightfully perceived that private industry can't/won't inure them to its free market dictums (read: maximize the return on Wall Street, use the cheapest BOP you can get away with, rush the job, damn the risks, and trust the government to bail you out of any jam) "why Obama doesn't simply nationalize the oil?" Obama has naively respected private enterprise and expected it to do its part in return. He is learning fast. BTW, what's so bad about communism? Red China seems to be doing quite well under communism. In fact, it's doing so well it can afford to finance our recent bail out of free market capitalism. Capitalism, in this context, must be viewed as a very, very expensive hobby that caters to a very few. People instinctively perceive that and, despite the rhetoric, they go for socialism (under other names) every thance they get.

Once again Sharon has injected her anti_Israel rhetoric ("this supply is now in peril by the action of one of our percieved vassal states.")into a thread where it does not belong. Editors!!!!!

Maybe I missed someone else posting this, but, you folks do know that BP is operating under a $75M liability cap, right?

Cracks me up.. can't burn off the oil because the "environmentalists" would rather destroy the marshlands, beaches and livelihoods of fishermen etc all along the coasts then put that nasty stuff into the air to be dispursed ( sorta like Volcanic eruptions) can't build berms cuz "environmentalists" don't want to disturb the sand/dirt ..wanting to leave it natural. Better that than to protect the animals and people of the coasts! can't use chemical disbursements cuz who knows what effect that will have?? better to destroy the coasts, animals and people. so..pray tell...what solutions does any environmentalist have to prevent further animal, coast and people damage ..note..committees, lawyers and lawsuits are not solutions or preventions. James Cameron, the oh-so-famous and knowledgeable director/producer off the Titanic ( please laugh at the irony), says BP has "morons" in charge of oil spill because they turned down his offer of help. Wow...what was he gonna do, shoot a film and fix the problem? So..please tell us, the world awaits, what solution to prevent damage would environmentalists/leftists etc accept? Our fury grows, especially those of us with any empathy or concern for all the folks, animals and land/sea of the coasts.

Sharon You left out that "environmentalists" told us that offshore drilling was a bad idea in the first place, because the inevitable blowouts and spills are bad for all the folks, animals and land/sea of the coasts. Or did you just blow off those environmental extremist huggers of folks, animals and land/sea of the coasts? After all, the oil companies know what they are doing, right? And if the government keeps out of their way, nothing can go wrong - go wrong - go wrong.

From Web Link ? Amount BP has spent since 2009 on high-powered lobbyists: $19.5 million ? Number of lobbyists that money bought: 49 ? Number of those lobbyists who used to work for Congress or the executive branch: 35 60 Minutes interviewed a survivor of the blowout. The job was costing BP a million dollars a day. Things were not moving fast enough, so the BP manager ignored known safety problems. Web Link Obama should force BP to pay every dime of cleanup costs (if cleanup is even possible) as well as giving every man, woman and child payment for lost homes and wages. Meanwhile, BP Turns is spending $50 Million on an ad campaign to convince you the company will 'Make It Right.' Web Link

Day 46. Only 6 of 24 permits necessary to build the sand berms have been approved (in principle). It took weeks of unnecessary delay to get to this point. Obama has placed a moritorium on current drilling efforts, despite the fact that it will devastate the economy of LA. We need to continue to drill, this time with the proper contingency plan in place. Lessons have been learned, and we are in a better position to react now than we were 46 days ago. We are not going off of oil, and we need to exploit our own resources instead of sending our $$ to those who hate us. Obama is not only tone deaf, he is incompetent. BTW, this is a good time for some smart inventor to come up with an automated machine that can clean up the tar balls on the beaches as well as the marsh land edges. It is pathetic that it is being done with rakes and rags.

Gavin, You clearly have a point of view about how this matter is being handled. That's fine. I request that you honor the readers of this blog trail by documenting your statements of fact. Such as the berms. I am of the opinion that nearly everyone with responsible positions for this matter have no clue what to do. You seem to be suggesting that the Obama Administration is making the problem worse through obstruction. And I would like you to back that up on my blog site, please. It may be a valid point of view, but as I perceive it, inconsistent with the many senior administration official's efforts to do all they can to deal with this matter. Help me understand the disconnect. We have to get this current problem addressed, but there are some larger policy questions about off shore drilling that will have to follow on from this tragedy. Thanks Gavin.

Paul L, Since you yourself did not provide any documentary material, and most of the other posters did not, I did not think it necessary. At any rate, here is an example link to Jindal's go-it-alone effort to protect his estuaries in LA by building sand berms. Note that the Army Corps of Engineers wanted to wait until an environmental impact study was done.Web Link I can provide references for other objective things I have mentioned (e.g. use of nuclear devices to kill runaway wells). However, before I go to the trouble, would you please provide your reference for the following statement that you made: "I did not perceive the GW Bush Administration taking a pro-active approach to dealing with the Hurricane Katrina disaster."? Note: I can provides references to the contrary. We can play dueling references all you want, Paul. Perhaps you should lead by example.

If we do not like drilling in the US waters then we have to fix our relationship with major oil suppliers like Iran and focus upon our national self interest and ignore lobbying groups that interfere with our best interests. We can talk with Iran and do a deal that will help us with Iraq, AFPAK and oil supplies. The majority of the Iran population is under 30yrs, they want change, we can do that. In the MX Gulf the cap is in place, we need sand berms, before the hurricanes come

Gavin, I am not one to get into pissing contests. Sec'y Chertoff during Katrina was challenged live by the press during Katrina about his understanding of the facts. W told his FEMA head that he was doing "a heckuava job." Brownie got fired a few days later. As I stated in an earlier post on this thread, I was in Dallas for a business meeting and had a nice lunch discussion with three folks who were from NO. They all felt that the way this matter is getting addressed at the local state and national level is much more engaged that what occured when Katrina hit NO. It still sucks, but there is a difference. As opposed to indifference.

Paul L, Once again, you provide no documentation. You were the one pissing at me about that. It is a simple request: Provide evidence (documented)that Bush/team demonstrated "indifference". Katrina was a much bigger deal than this oil well blowout. Of course New Orleans officials seem more engaged now, because they are not flooded out! How would those three ladies know what the level of engagement was, if they were stuck in New Orleans during the flood? Or are you saying that they got out, then watched Geraldo Rivera to form their impression? It is one thing to have a point of view, Paul, but you should, when requested, provide some documentation. That is what you asked of me. Lead by example.

Which countries lead on coal mine deaths? Capitalist or Statist?

Bush et al were not indifferent...at all. National center told Louisianans to vacate..many chose not to. Buses were there to be used to vacate folks...lay unused cuz some lawyer in New Orleans was worried about liability. Feds were lined up outside the borders of Louisiana, asking to come in and help..were turned down by the Gov, turned down by the Mayor. Didn't accept help until the levies broke, and even then it was some time sorry, that die don't roll.. but the narrative is set...Bush didn't care, in fact set it up because of racism, over $300,000 PER PERSON of Fed money rolled out..still not rebuilt because of racism.. ( nothing to do with State, City or personal responsiblity) blah blah blah Some narratives are religious in nature..can't fight it with facts.

let's not forget the BILLIONS siphoned to Lousiana to fix those *&^% levies, money sent for the 30 years before Katrina..which were never fixed. The State of Huey Long was alive and well long after he wasn't.

"Bush et al were not indifferent...at all." Nor was Karl Rove. He knew that withholding aid would cause a permanent black diaspora and seriously weaken the Democratic Party base in Lousiana. Gov Jindal should be (and doubtless is) grateful for the neglect.

BP is not just any oil company. As reported in Sunday?s New York Post , ?BP is Britain?s largest company and the biggest holding in most British pension funds.? It pays out one-seventh of the dividends paid in the FTSE 100, the UK?s equivalent of the Down Jones average. So large parts of the British population feel it personally when the administration listens to its left wing and major media friends and talks as if the company were a criminal conspirator. Of the mood in London, The Post reports, that even The Independent, ?a left-wing environmental newspaper,? has run nearly hysterical columns defending BP and worrying if it will survive. And at the conservative London Telegraph, another columnist has summed up that, ?This crisis has injected an animus into transatlantic relations unseen since the days of George III.?

Day 51. Again, it takes Gov. Jindal to get on a small barge/boat and demonstrate that vacuum machines can clean up the stuff. But the Coast Guard will not allow any more than five machines until further study. Obama has not actually spoken to the BP CEO (amazing!). He needs to get on the hook and TELL BP that they are going to pay for any and all reasonable ideas (vacuums, straw, centifuges, etc.). He then needs to instruct the Coast that he, as CiC, is overiding their delays. Obama just doesn't get it. This an environmental war, and he is treating it as a political and metrics issue. He has bigger fish to fry, including cap-and-tax and a Gulf restoration plan that goes way beyond cleaning up the mess (he wants to make BP pay for a redirection of the Mississippi River!). It wouldn't look good if the people of the Gulf were able to clean up the mess themselves using their own ingenuity. Jindal should be appointed to take over the entire operation. Obama can stay in touch with him from the golf course.

Paul, "he knew that withholding aid would cause a black diaspora" Paul, I mean..good God Almighty!! Please provide anything that shows there was any "withholding of aid" to anyone. I think over $300,000 per person average to the area for rebuilding ( still not rebuilt, FYI, but somehow the rest of the coast that didn't get aid was rebuilt within 2 years...odd how that works, isn't it?), free relocations in hotels ( I was there in several hotels that I had to actually pay for over the next year with folks who were there still free one year later), continuing welfare checks and relocation assistance is not exactly "withholding aid". Especially with all the credit cards with no limits passed on to everyone and anyone, spent on much that wasn't food, shelter, clothing and transportationg. I am no longer breathless at the statements that come from hard-core templates, but still must respond. Gavin: Completely with you. Either you have connections to Louisiana, or you really know the oil issue. Either way, you are dead on. Every conceivable self-defense maneuver of the southern coasts has been blocked by this White House. They didn't want the Feds to actually HELP,they just wanted permission to be proactive, bypass the bureaucratic Fed "process" and get to work defending themselves. It is truly appalling to watch the shrimp, fishing and tourist industries go down the toilet for no reason, and to watch the destruction of the wetlands. There was no reason for it other than indifference, ( or in my darker moments, I wonder if this is purposeful to turn people off to Oil and advance the WH goals?) to the effects on humans and the environment alike. Bureacratic bumbling to the worst degree..almost all the damage washing ashore now preventable. Absolutely stunning, especially from a Party and WH that has purported to "care about the environment" more than the "other" party.. Give me back people who can actually do something, rather than appoint committees to 'study" the problem, threaten lawsuits, and talk about ( of course) raising taxes and regulations on oil. I was hardly concerned initially, confident in the ability of the South to put its "can do" knowledge to work to prevent most of the damage from this spill, but I am now reaching the boiling point as I listen to friends and family and watch the Titanic sink ( oh yes!! We have the director of the movie Titanic on Obamas "smart" team, studying the situation..we are in good hands!!) Ok, enough, I am just ranting at this point.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Wait a sec PA Online...you let this horrific racist accusation stand "Posted by Paul, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jun 7, 2010 at 10:25 am "Bush et al were not indifferent...at all." Nor was Karl Rove. He knew that withholding aid would cause a permanent black diaspora and seriously weaken the Democratic Party base in Lousiana. Gov Jindal should be (and doubtless is) grateful for the neglect." But not well documented response that the Feds gave out an average of $300,000 per person to Lousiana, whose displaced people also were put up with free housing up to a year later ( as I experienced myself in several trips to the area being unable to book many hotel rooms up to a year later because they were being "occupied" by fed assisted residents).. and all continued aid checks as already qualified for, and "credit cards" that were well documented to be highly abused... and yet years later New Orleans is still not fully rebuilt, but the rest of the States have managed to rebuild WITHOUT fed "help"??? Wish I had kept a copy so I could figure out why you deleted it. Bottom line, if something "offended" someone in my post, fine..your right is to delete as you see fit..but I am highly offended by the continual assertion and template of "racism" involved in Katrina, and wish you would allow defenses to stand...

Latest item of interest involving our Feds blocking good ways to block damage to our coasts and the destruction of the livelihood of untold people Web Link Summary, our WH turned down an offer of help by the Netherlands 3 DAYS post spill, with tried and true abilities to suck up oil ( at the rate of 20,000 tons per day)...and build sand berms... The offer was made THREE DAYS post start of spill, and our WH said no thanks. How many tons of oil and sludge would NOT be in the Gulf and along the coast right now if this Admin hadn't ignored the problem,..then studied it...and just now has started "accepting help". All the WH had to do was say "yes, we can"..that is it.. do the math

Day 56. Another speech by Obama is in the offing. More spin. The article about the Dutch offer of booms to clean up the oil and building of sand berms (3 days after the blowout), rejected but now tentatively accepted by the Obama team, is entirely consistent with the massively incompetent Obama "leadership"(see the link by "Perspective", above). Believe it or not, the Jones Act, which prevents foreign cargo ships operating in national waters, is being used as an excuse to prevent outside help from an expert and friendly nation. Where has Obama been? Why hasn't already gone to Congress to get an exmpetion to the Jones Act? We are being led by a truly incompetent executive team. It is all political calculation, as usual, but this time it is backfiring on them.

Day 59. Once again, the Gulf states are being denied their own efforts to clean up the mess. The Coast Guard stopped the local barges that are actualy doing what needs to be done: Clean up the oil! Web Link Large tankers are denied access to the Gulf waters because of the Jones Act, designed and defended by labor, prevents them from doing so. This is large scale and effective and proven methodology...but no, Obama does not dare offend labor. Obama decides to shake down BP and get a 20B slush fund. The contigency lawyers are ecstatic (of course), but the oil, which should be being sucked out of the water, is left in limbo. How many more weeks/months will this massive incompetence be tolerated?

There still are no heroes. And some villians are emerging. Working backward... Who the hell is this Congressman accusing the USG of doing a "$20 billion shakedown" of BP? His comments were so egregious that his GOP colleagues distanced themselves from them within minutes, and the guy subsequently apologized for his apology. Open mouth, insert foot. English as a second language BP Chairman yesterday on the White House driveway talking about the "small people" affected by this tragedy. GOP Congressional leader Boehner commenting that BP should not be paying for this disaster, it should be the USG. This is the same guy who complains that the USG is spending too much on everything. And he wants to take on more instead of foisting it on a corporation that clearly is accountable for what it going on? President as Hamlet. He may have succeeded to get a $20 billion escrow account out of BP the other day, but his connection with the American public on this has been pathetic, including his address from the Oval Office the other night. It is easy to critize many parties on this matter. What is missing to this writer is that anyone involved seems to have a clear idea of what the problem is that is going on and how to solve it. Obama tried the other night for both the short term issue about the well and the long term issue about dependency on oil. Watch the Wednesday night episode of the "Daily Show with Jon Stewart." Barack is in good company, going back to Nixon.

"According to Simons, ?There is no casing left in the well bore...so there is zero chance of the relief wells working.? Relief wells are designed to pierce the casing so cement can be injected to seal the hole. ?This is an open hole,? Simmons said, ?There is nothing to pierce. The only way to stop this thing is a low level nuclear weapon. It?s the only solution.?" Web Link Obama has yet to have any serious talks with nuclear bomb experts. He is a deer in the headlights. He said he is doing everything possible. That is a lie. He is going for cheap headlines by shaking down BP, because he thinks that is clever politics. As the head of the federal government, which receives huge sums of royalty monies from the oil companies, and which has oversight of drilling activities, is he demanding a multi-billion "escrow account" set aside by the U.S. government? Obama is actively PREVENTING the oil cleanup. There should have been large tankers out there sucking up the majority of the oil from early on, and Obama actively rejected the offer. Several local efforts have been prevented by Obama. He is using the crisis as a political vehicle to impose new taxes.

Working forwards 1) Who was it in govt that approved every step of the way for this oil rig? 2) Who was it in govt that obstructed every step of the way ANY solutions from every country and business that offered to help sop up the oil as it gushed out, and prevent it from reaching out shores? 3) Who was it, in government, that has decided what to do with the taxes gained from BP, taxes equal to any profit made by BP..where is the money? 3) Who is it in the Executive Branch doing, yet again, an end run around our laws, blackmailing, yet again, a private company into "donating" monies to clean up GOVERNMENT screw ups, govt screw ups CAUSED BY a certain current POTUS. I agree with the LA congressman..I am truly ashamed of the thugocracy now in control of our nation, destroying all trust in us, turning us into a Venezuela or other type of govt which simply does away with the rule of law. ( Recall the end runs last year: the Executive Branch arm twisting banks into giving up control and taking TARP funds, and breaking contractual law with their compensation packages...after a certain current POTUS lit the fire of an economic meltdown as a young Columbia visiting law lecturer promoted, through ACORN, how to sue Citicorp into giving the keys of houses to folks with no job, and no deposit, no "skin in the game".., and teaching the Alinsky style of societal destruction in the Columbia classroom..anything to advance the goals of his ideology at the expense of the American people..and he is still at it) 4) And who is it, in government, who is now putting a "moratorium" ( under what constitutional authority, I ask?) on offshore drilling, driving oil companies to throw up their arms in disgust at the USA, driving them to look elsewhere to countries that welcome them with open arms ( look up Brazil and oil drilling)..driving away the jobs and tax base from the USA. Look up how much in taxes alone oil companies pay to the USA Fed govt. It is equal to their profit. Do you hear the giant sucking sound of yet more tax revenue going down the drain? No, I lay at least equal blame, in fact more, for the destruction caused by this spill on our Government system and those in charge every step of the way. Our POTUS not only obstructed every solution proposed in favor of establishig committees made of know-nothings who "studied" the situation, he has now incentivized oil companies to seek friendlier countries. Good job!

I couldn't understand the "English as a second language" reference to the BP comment above. So, in researching it, I see that there is a tempest in a teapot because apparently a few folks don't understand that there is, indeed, a large/grand difference in the way Yankees speak English, and England dwellers speak English ( we won't even go into how the Irish and the Scots and the Aussies all differ). I understand roughly half of what is said to me, even when I understand the actual words, when I travel anywhere in Britain. Too bad about this "tempest".. makes us look like small/little provincial minds. Ever wonder why you need subtitles for English films? It isn't just accents..it is word choice and phrases.Ask anyone who has actually left our little provincial world of California how much they understand of English spoken even in NYC, let alone in Britain. This is just one small/little example which shouldn't have taken too much of a leap in transliteration to understand, esp by those who purport to be purveyors of concepts through language, like our own media.

[Post removed due to excessive and/or repetitive post by same poster]

BTW, without knowing anything else about oil drilling ...put together the logical consequences of this moratorium on drilling for oil off our shores.. Companies have to be always drilling to keep up their inventory of oil..a moratorium will just drive them to other countries that have no problem with drilling Results: 1) No less drilling in the world, just transferred from our shores 2) Jobs in drilling go to other countries 3) Tax revenue from the oil sold from the drilling go to other governments ( the tax money we get is equal to the oil company profits, remember) 4) Our security is yet more compromised, as yet more of our energy fate rests in the hands of other countries who can turn off our spigot in a nanosecond...anyone attacks us and we need to defend ourselves, but no oil for the military to function? Good plan. 5) Price of gas/oil goes up as we produce less and less of our own. Overall, it is a plan that only hurts Americans...as usual. This is so typical now, policies which hurt Americans, I am almost starting to believe the conspiracy theories about the Manchurian Candidate...

First, do no harm The court ruling today around the POTUS suspension of allowing new rigs drilling for 6 months is a classic. There is a very persausive argument that this "hold" on rigs doing anything in the Gulf for a period of time in prudent. There is a very persuasive argument that this "hold" on rigs doing anything in the Gulf for a period of time is counterproductive. I side with the judge, not the White House on this one. My understanding from the judge's ruling is that he used the analogy of an airplane crash. We need to learn from it, but we are not going to stop flying. Drilling oil wells responsibly is still an open question, and BP does not appear to have that of its corporate culture. But tarring the entire idustry with the same brush is disingenous. The judge made a good call. All that said, the "procedures" revealed in Congressional hearings last week that apparently were copied by all the major oil companies, which included among other things how to deal with walruses (in the Gulf of Mexico?) does suggest not just an intellectual laziness but also a lack of taking seriously this type of matter as part of their risk management startegy. There remaain no heroes in this matter, but LA Gov. Jindahl seems to be much more clear headed than others involved in this disaster.

Obama just announced (via Ken Salazar) that a new moratorium will be slapped into place within the next few days. Obama reads the polls and understands the metrics (he loves political metrics). A moratorium is popular at this moment. He thinks he can ride the wave of BP-hatred into a cap-and-tax bill. As soon as a moratorium becomes unpopular Obama will back off. For those on the front lines in the Gulf states the moratorium is an economic death sentence. Gov. Jindal is on top the issues down in LA. He should be put in charge of the entire operation. For the people who have to get the job done Obama is lacking in leadership...witness the blowup with Gen. McCrystal in Afghanistan.

Even more than learning from errors, as the judge noted, I appreciate his sticking to the root of the question: Obama is not following our laws in issuing these moratoriums. There is no constitutional authority for him to dicatatorally shut down an entire industry. The reasoning for our Constitution and Rights was based on what works and what doesn't work to hold together a society. We are a nation of laws and constitution, not of new "good ideas". Our elected leaders vow to uphold, defend and protect our Constitution, not us, the people, because in upholding, defending and protecting the Constitution, they uphold, defend and protect us, the people. When they forget this, and try to use their own ideologies to give us "good ideas" and policies, we get hurt. Here is Gibbs telling us why Obama supposedly wants this moratorium. He states such drilling "puts the safety of those involved, potentially puts safety of those on the rigs and the safety of the environment and the Gulf at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford right now." Reagan had it right when he said that the scariest sentence is "i'm from the government and I'm here to help you". This kind of "protection" we can do without. Every misguided policy intended to "help" someone has the ripple effects of hurting others. When the intended consequences are far outweighed by the unintended damage, it is time to halt the "help". So, we have a White House now suing against a State to keep in place a policy that will destroy the rest of the southern coast economy..and a White House about to sue another State to prevent it from taking action against illegal aliens and their continued destruction of its safety and economy ( Arizona)...This WH is at war with our States. November can't come fast enough, we have to block him/his ideology until we can get him and all his incompetent ideologue "czars" and appointees ( Attorney General, Surgeon General, Education Secretary..) out of office.

Day 64. Once again, Obama's team is blocking the sand berms ( Web Link ). "Once again, our government resource agencies, which are intended to protect us, are now leaving us vulnerable to the destruction of our coastline and marshes by the impending oil," Nungesser wrote to Obama. " It just keeps going from bad to worse with this incompetent Obama team.

Irreparable harm. People's lives are ruined as a consequence of this tragedy. I don't even pretend to understand the complexities of getting this thing fixed. I am beginning to wonder if it CAN be fixed. My perception is that BP, the USG, and the states affected in the Gulf all have put significant resources into dealing with the issue. Leadership? Different topic. My opinion is that BP is the lead pony in this race. Regulators, the Coast Guard, and other such entities must be actively engaged in solving the problem, but they are approving, not leading the solution to this problem. I think BP has vary capable people working on this, and they probably are better skilled at fixing than are public sector employees. One thing that I find bothersome about this entire matter is how BP's competition has stayed out of the fray. A situation like this, to my way of thinking, calls for working together to help solve the problem. It does not appear such is the case, the Exxons and Chevrons of the world are just letting BP fend for itself. Pretty short sighted, as I view it.

Day 84. Obama actively prevented significant outside help. Now his Oil Spill Commission, made up of environmental extremists, is being used as a foil to enforce a moritorium on future off shore drilling. Even they are objecting to that. The Obama team has made it clear that they hate to waste a crisis, but they are completely out of tune with this opportunity. This thing is all about leadership, namely bad leadership on the part of Obama.

Where's the oil in the ocean? You mean to tell me, all that panic and outrage was for naught? All that damage to the ocean and dead fish was ..for naught? You mean..the ocean did what it does, absorbs millions of gallons of oil, which it does naturally all the time anyway from the constant leaks from the sea floor? In the meantime, there is STILL a moratorium on drilling off our shore, the companies are leaving for other countries, our jobs are shut down and our southern shores' employees unemployed. Why was this White House determined to block every effort to lower the damage to our shores and our people? Surely not to manipulate the American people to support their ridiculous and constant push toward Cap and Trade? Why is this White House continuing to destroy OUR jobs and OUR oil independence? This Party MUST be overturned in all areas ASAP. It is a Party consistently against American citizen interests. Louisiana rates this WH response to the oil WORSE than the Katrina response. Yet, where is the constant media hammering? Read any paper with all your neurons firing, and you will see nothing but propaganda, from the headlines that state "slower recovery than expected" ( WHAT recovery? There is none!!) to the headlines that aren't there about Iraq, Afghanistan, the corruption in the White House and hundreds of czars, the obstruction of effective oil spill solutions, the upcoming huge tax increases on all of us, covert and not covert, ...etc. The good news is that I believe most Americans are waking up. We may be a little naive and believe the hype and "hope" at first, but we DO eventually catch on ...

I posted this yesterday, but must have put it someplace else than here...This BP oil thing is another great example of creating a crisis from one that isn't, all for an external gain of political agenda and power. ( like every other manufactured "crisis" in the last 2 years, what have been the results of this one? Who gained? Follow the money and the power) I heard a great comparison for us to understand the amount of actual oil spilled in the BP thing...Web Link If you fill up the Dallas Cowboys Stadium with water, then spill 24 ounces ( 2 cans) of beer in it, that is the amount of total oil spilled in the Gulf. Furhtermore, the amount of oil is no more than 4X the amount leaked naturally EVERY YEAR by the Gulf, and the Gulf is filled with oil-eating plants, with wildlife dependent on these plants for their survival. In other words, the Gulf leaks, naturally, this much oil into its waters every 4 years. As usual, a huge sky-is-falling outcry from the uninformed, ..proving once again that a lie makes it around the world before the truth has time to put on its pants ( Mark Twain??) But why would our Admin/Press go along with this hysterical, sky is falling routine AGAIN??? The biggest story here is the RESPONSE OF THIS ADMIN...so far, because of the obstructionist policies of this Admin, and because of the shut down of the oil rigs ( for no reason..yet still continuing), we have lost over 75,000 jobs, to the tune of over 2.5 Billion dollars in lost wages. Dem response? Let them go on unemployment ( eat cake?) Use all this to push Cap and Trade, and shut down BIG OIL ( said in the same tone of voice we USED to reserve for "MAFIA") Think about it..stop falling for the hysteria, America. Listen to the calm heads, not the crying sky is falling ones. And open the *&(( oil rigs..let us get back to business before we lose more oil rigs to other countries. We've lost 2 of the 33 so far, to the Congo and Egypt, and are scheduled to lose another 5 soon.All as a rational response of oil drilling companies to keep their rigs rolling. Web Link