I just want to know where all the dire concern is from the media on the slow response from the government on the oil spill in the gulf? It has been two weeks now and I don't really see much government activity on the matter? I seem to recall that when Katrina hit it was like the morning after when the frenzy began....
the republicans fumbling over themselves to blame this on obama is disgusting. not surprising though.
Comparing this to Katrina is like hanging a sign around your neck that says "Hi! I'm a flaming moron!"
It's funny when you actually can see this crap trickle down. First Limbaugh trots it out I believe. I actually was channel surfing when I saw Hannity trot it out on his show the other night and now we see the crap has oozed down and finally made it's way onto here.
1.The world as we know it runs on oil 2.Most of the easily reached reserves in the US are close to expended 3. For our national security and prosperity we need to access deep water sources 4. This is hard, dangerous and risky. It is inevitable that there will be some levels of disasters 5. You do your best to avoid them, you do your best to clean them up but there will be destruction 6. This will spur a national movement toward alternative energy so maybe the net damage over the long term will actually be reduced. I'm off to drive my 4000 lb. car to get some skrimps while they are still in the store.
, BP's rig safety mechanism failed. then they said the oil stopped flowing, then they said it was only 1k barrels a day now they say 5k market forews at work
Look, I think the hate on Bush for Katrina was blown WAY out of proportion, but are you serious? In one case you had people stranded in a flooded city with stories of looting, violence and rape taking place as they waited on assistance. In this case you have a coastline preparing for oil to come ashore. You think the two are comparable?
Is this really the new theme for starting threads? Randomly raging without providing evidence/facts to back up said rage, waiting to see if someone else can provide it, and then tucking tail and running when shown otherwise? So what would you have liked, OddsOn? Literally less than 24 hours after the Coast Guard discovers the severity of the leak, Obama responds with maximum capacity, and then 3 days later, as the slick makes major landfall, he actually goes to the site to oversee cleanup efforts. Instead of, you know, flying over the area and just looking out the window in Air Force One coming back from a vacation taken *after* the crisis began. And if you want even more proof, the White House has been detailing their every move regarding Deepwater Horizon on their website: And finally, did you not see that there is already a thread on Deepwater Horizon literally an inch or two away from the top of the first page? Do you think your angry, misguided ranting about the same subject deserves its own thread, or are you just too busy/lazy/angry to read? (I guess we already know that much is true, as evidenced above)
let's say the government wasn't prepared, for the DRILL BABY DRILL crowd to complain that the government isn't prepared for an accident when they want more drilling is so utterly freakin ridiculous it makes my head explode
As DonnyMost has noted the government has been involved from the beginning. The one criticism I would raise though is the government's, particularly the Coast Guard's over reliance on BP to provide information. What this situation tells me is that we need more regulation and caution in regard to oil exploration, really any energy project with a high degree of risk. If you, OddsOn and others, are calling for more regulation and caution on the part of the government I would be glad to join you in that outrage.
sarah palin had a moment of clarity and called for more regulation. I guess if you have a family member who could be involved in one of these accidents you have no choice but to put politics aside
You don't see much because you don't want to. I can tell you from my perch, this is the major priority within the emergency response sector of the Federal government. We (fire people) are concerned not only with the spill, but also because it may suck up a tremendous number of resources as wildfire season starts (and if 90+ day projections are correct, we may be shorthanded for the duration). But this is clearly more important than a few extra burned acres. Already there are a bunch of communications folks in the Gulf setting up radio repeaters so there is coverage over every square inch of shore that might be affected. We've also sent planners and meteorologists and a host of logistics people and others to design a response that can quickly be implemented and supported long-term as more oil hits land. As more land becomes affected, it is thought there will be a major resource deployment of crews and teams. Some of these folks are part of the larger response while others are focused on specific wildlife refuges and national park units that ring the Gulf. Looking at it as objectively as I possibly can, the difference between this and Katrina is significant in time and coordination and effort. Fox News has been spewing forth the lie that it was a week and a half before the Feds did anything. As you can see from previous posts, this is simply not true. However, I will grant that is difficult for people who don't want to know to know that out in the ocean there are a lot of things going on and on land there are a lot of things going on that don't make good TV... but when the oil hits and it is easier for the news crews and even Fox to get video of the response, it will be evident even to those folks that something is happening. These complaints remind me of the people who think if you're not flying an air tanker that's dropping r****dant in their backyard you're not doing anything to fight the fire, even though there are firefighters with engines and dozers just over the next ridge. Out of view, out of mind doesn't make it reality.
