who to blame, from slate:

http://www.slate.com/id/2254979/

Pretty much sums it up.

I have doubts the top-fill is going to work. I hope I'm wrong.

So it's ok to accept the worsening disaster with no effort to minimize the impact on the shoreline because we all know BP is at fault??? Watching CNN there appears to be absolutely nothing being done with a sense of urgency. The Prez will show up on day 39 and tell us about what he is going to do for everyone and how he will hold BP accountable, but the oil is steadily getting worse in the marshes of Louisiana while no cleanup or preventative measures are being taken. Blame BP and fine them 20 billion dollars but in the meantime get down there and clean the damn thing up.

Excellent..brought up parties I didn't even know were involved

There is a middle ground here without a doubt. I'm just suspicious of the righties who are clammoring to attach anything that goes wrong anywhere to Obama. And no...Bush never faced that...only the things he WAS responsible for..like a freakin' war.

Ironic that they said the only sure way to stop this is to drill a relief well, but "that would take 30 days at least".... 35 days later and counting, only to come up with a halfassed measure that will stem the flow at best but not completely seal the well head errr....whatever is left of the wellhead...

It's a complete joke to see him flying in to Andrews from Cali after a fund-raising junket for Barbara Boxer, good news is that it looks like he can fit it into his schedule by Friday...

No fan of W by any stretch, but that fuc1<er would have demanded that relief well started the minute the flames were put out on the torched one.

Oh, the relief well is still at least 30 days away...

the leak has nothing to do w/Obama, Bush or Mars! Cap it and let these bastards (BP and Lloyds of London) pay!!!!! Then lets Fannie and Freddie free! Like Willie! The whale not the former Pres! :)

i didn't realize who was involved either. as for using this as an example of small govt fans not wanting involvement from the feds; this imo is one case where absolutely they should have been involved. this isn't just an oil spill, but a catastrophic failure on many levels, with wide-ranging impact on a number of industries-and of course the impact on the environment and wildlife is just disgraceful. the lack of real reaction by our leaders is unreal, especially considering just how long this has been going on.
thing is, we already are paying through the nose for a variety of govt agencies, which have shown they are certainly not worth the investment. the part of the slate article that discussed the federal agencies was a real eye opener. it's a disgrace.

news to me. it seems that the opposition is always quick to point fingers at the executive.

There is no way that liberals are as trigger happy as righties..no way.

i beg to differ. it's in each parties best interest to bash everything the other does-every move, issue, is dissected to determine how best to attack, and gain points. it's how the dems got both congress and white house, when only a few short years ago we were reading their obituary. then, in the last year, it was the republicans on life support.

agree not with guns but blame?

And I love it when Republicans start being concerned with wildlife...that's a first. And no, your duel membership bumperstickers of NRA and Ducks Unlimited doesn't count.

C'mon you lived in the state. No one but WI and every other state who has wild life has that concern.

No, the relief well (2 access points) was started, and is currently still being drilled and set up. I heard 2 months, however, until completion. I think they started it about a week after the disaster.

Regarding the BP spill, and KY coal miners recently killed:

"Accidents can happen" - Rand Paul

OK..I'll broaden that..since when have Republicans ever been concerned about the planet? Come on Dell...who has been pushing for more off shore drilling the last 10 years and who hasn't?

I agree completely with, "why the heck is this still going on, why has nothing been done" - I'm furious over that.

But the trouble is, regarding "the government taking over": what is the government supposed to do after they "take over"? Serious question. They've been "supervising" BP - the government doesn't have the equipment, or the manpower, or the technology (not that BP specifically does, they are winging it at this depth). I suppose one could scream at BP louder? It's obvious BP could care less about the environmental damage in any sense other than PR and fines. I think the only thing that could have been done by the government was get on BP faster, more quickly, about their covering up the amount of spilled oil; bring in independent scientists sooner as government agents? I thought that happened after two weeks, I could be wrong.

I heard that there are oil company tankers (sitting full of oil) that Obama could command to the area to take up spilled oil from the surface (they can separate out the water/oil), but what do they do with the thousands of gallons of oil already on board (they would have to empty out somewhere, somehow, first), and can the President commandeer private property? (I assume he could in a national disaster, don't know)

this is what we are all about. The Republicans are all about America first and thats why I'm a Rep (actually a librterian but the opposite would make me a communist
) and so we shall vote and see how things go! Like forcing you to weed Arington's infield cause you live in the Heights and they forget u own and pay for horses etc etc etc etc etc

The GOP is not all about "America first", it is all about "private corporations and business and commerce and no government" first. Social programs, people, the environment - have never been the GOP strong point.

They initially said 30 days, but assured them it would never be necessary because they had all the proper safety/environmental bases covered ...all the while distracing them (the Interior Dept) as the were too busy being wined and dined and watching porn at work to give a good rats asz

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05...wake-of-spill/

Change we can believe in

It's infuriating, how much everyone was allowed to get away with regarding safety, etc (coal industry - ditto)

But that "change we can believe in" was supposed to have already shook those "TX oilmen in the WH, have a secret meeting with Cheney, boys" years up. We'll see.

kinda like capitalism ????

but wasn't it obama who just signed off on more drilling?

Yes, Dell, from what I've seen, in modern times the GOP has always been the party that supported capitalism, over the Dems.

Obama signed off on limited shallow water drilling, with caveats and alot of state controls. It was a token PR move for the right.

cause you were his guy right? LOL

This clearly was Nixon's fault

Well..it certainly wasn't Obama's fault

You down here at alll this weekend?

Last I remembered, Bush (after agreeably being shaken while reading to schoolchildren) made it a point to put aside fund-raising and all of his other "responsibilities" to get to Ground Zero in a manner that stressed the importance of rallying the country around a disaster of immeasurable proportions.

You're guy, not so much

:zz: Again, Dell, separate out the voices in your head from me ;)

I'm against putting more into additional oil drilling. I want alternative forms of energy - wind & geothermal. I don't care for nuclear, there are safer ways to make steam. In the US we have no strong impetus to go alternative routes.

Dan..you are comparing 9/11 to BP's explosion?

That's exactly the point...less dependancy on oil makes this all unnecessary

so I take it ur anti-euro and the steps they've taken; especially France?

and of course China needs to be stopped now?

HOW?

And Russia.

But the U.S. needs to stop drilling and magically all of those countries mentioned will too.

Obama didn't say, "You're doing a heck of a job, BP" ;)

:zz:

Sorry, you'll have to clarify. I do not have a clue what fight you are trying to start, over what :D

Bob,
Are you assuming that this disaster is less important to the security of our Nation? Or our Nation's well being?

It's assinine to compare the two....

I'm not "comparing" anything - I'm stressing the importance of the President of the United States of America role in salvaging one of our only unreplaceable resources, while keeping a level head and assuring our nation that he is involved at the highest level...Sorta like actually showing up...

Not sending his dimwitted lackey who is directly complicit in the entire mess...

Not putting the importance of jetting off to California to raise money for Barbara Boxer above this - this will be the downfall of any legacy he had envisioned for himself.

I thought you had compared Bush's reaction of 9/11 to Obama's of Day 35 of the BP spill?

There are two different arguements happening here...If you want to say that by now the US Govt should be more involved?..Sure..I can't argue that. But to say that situation is comparable to Katrina or 9/11 or to say it's Obama's Spill is crazy I think. It's just Republican's looking for an edge.