Obama's Oil Spill

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

The fishing industry is kapoot in the Gulf. The people who are affected by this might as well be dead. It's not like the majority of them are highly educated. How are they going to provide for their families now?

Wow.

I see no reasonable way to compare dying to losing a job. Not even if you're uneducated, not even if you lose your livelihood, not for anything, since you know, you're still NOT DEAD.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Wow.

I see no reasonable way to compare dying to losing a job. Not even if you're uneducated, not even if you lose your livelihood, not for anything, since you know, you're still NOT DEAD.

An instant death by disaster is no different than a slow one. Do you not agree that lives will be destroyed due to this disaster? How about suicides?

It is a family tradition to some of these fishermen. Generations of work lost due to incompetence and greed by the government.

Rebuilding will be an impossible obstacle for some of them to overcome.

And remember that most of these fishermen and their families dealt with Katrina as well. It's a double whammy of bad luck.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

An instant death by disaster is no different than a slow one. Do you not agree that lives will be destroyed due to this disaster? How about suicides?

It is a family tradition to some of these fishermen. Generations of work lost due to incompetence and greed by the government.

Rebuilding will be an impossible obstacle for some of them to overcome.

Lives destroyed. People lose jobs all the time. Generations of work or not, it's a lost job. A decreased standard of living or a need to learn to do something else is still not dying. I'm not saying for a second that this isn't a catastrophic life event for lots of people -- but it's not the same as dying, because there is a chance to do something else and a chance to still live a life....just because it's not the one you're used to or because it's not the one you want doesn't make it equal in any way to literally DYING.

And suicide is almost universally an elective decision, so again, not the same thing at all. Unfortunate, yes, but still a choice so I'm not willing to take people drowning in a disaster they had no control over on equal footing with someone who puts a bullet into their head because their life isn't what it used to be. Maybe that's just me.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Lives destroyed. People lose jobs all the time. Generations of work or not, it's a lost job. A decreased standard of living or a need to learn to do something else is still not dying. I'm not saying for a second that this isn't a catastrophic life event for lots of people -- but it's not the same as dying, because there is a chance to do something else and a chance to still live a life....just because it's not the one you're used to or because it's not the one you want doesn't make it equal in any way to literally DYING.

And suicide is almost universally an elective decision, so again, not the same thing at all. Unfortunate, yes, but still a choice so I'm not willing to take people drowning in a disaster they had no control over on equal footing with someone who puts a bullet into their head because their life isn't what it used to be. Maybe that's just me.

Why? Most of the people who decided to stay in New Orleans for Katrina were suicidal. Or at the very least had suicidal tendencies. This excludes those without means to get out and the mentally retarded.

Any rational person could see that Katrina was going to wreak havoc at least 4 days before it hit land. They had time to get out.

The fishing industry was stuck like Chuck.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

The fishing industry was stuck like Chuck.

So that somehow means it's equal to literally dying, where if they had some advance warning, it would be different?

I don't follow your line of thinking or the way you see the loss of a job as equal to death. I'd pretty universally rather be unemployed than dead, in fact I can't think of a single instance in which I'd rather be dead -- no polling on the topic, but I'm pretty sure most would not equate job loss, no matter how important and specialized, as being give or take the same thing as just being actually dead.

Will agree to disagree on this one again, because there's obviously a huge disconnect between how we see jobs vs. dying, and there's no way to advance a conversation about it.

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

So that somehow means it's equal to literally dying, where if they had some advance warning, it would be different?

I don't follow your line of thinking or the way you see the loss of a job as equal to death. I'd pretty universally rather be unemployed than dead, in fact I can't think of a single instance in which I'd rather be dead -- no polling on the topic, but I'm pretty sure most would not equate job loss, no matter how important and specialized, as being give or take the same thing as just being actually dead.

Will agree to disagree on this one again, because there's obviously a huge disconnect between how we see jobs vs. dying, and there's no way to advance a conversation about it.

I said might as well be dead. Big difference, Brian. The stress that some of these people are facing is going to be unbelievable and the majority of them won't have insurance or the means to see a therapist. Instead they'll be put on depression meds and in zombie mode to deal with life.

And I would rather be dead than live life like that.

[joeydb]

I just heard on the radio that they are in the middle of trying that "Top Kill" procedure, with the cement and aggregate. Hopefully it will work.

Keep your fingers crossed. At least then the amount of oil will not be increasing, and we can focus all manpower on getting it cleaned up.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I said might as well be dead. Big difference, Brian. The stress that some of these people are facing is going to be unbelievable and the majority of them won't have insurance or the means to see a therapist. Instead they'll be put on depression meds and in zombie mode to deal with life.

And I would rather be dead than live life like that.

In no way minimizing what these people are about to go through -- but this happens everywhere in this country, every single day. If people get put in terrible, stressful, spots and feel lost and want to check out and kill themselves or wish they were dead, that's their call. If they want to try to find a way to recover, that's their choice too.

But I can't envision a single scenario in which I would choose the former, and for as much as it may seem out of character for someone like me, I'm not exactly bursting at the seams with sympathy for people who do.

[Danzig]

who to blame, from slate:

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

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.

[Thunder Gulch]

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.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

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.

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.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GBBob

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.

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!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

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.

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

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

who to blame, from slate:

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

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

[Rudeboyelvis]

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...

[Riot]

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

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.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

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

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.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

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.

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)