Althouse: "And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this!"

May 26, 2010

"And it just looks like he's not involved in this! Man, you have got to get down here and take control of this!"

"Put somebody in charge of this and get this thing moving! We're about to die down here!"

236 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 236 of 236

Jason said...: So Beth, your complaint is that Obama and BP are acting like Mayor Nagin and Louisiana Democrats?; 5/26/10, 8:36 PM
Dumb Plumber said...: If we could only find a way to shove Obama's ego into that pipe..... the problem would be solved.; 5/26/10, 8:36 PM
AC245 said...: AlphaLiberal, are you denying that the 2008 IG report on MMS cited in that Associated Press article exists?

Are you denying that Democrats knew of the report, and even used it to try to score political points? ("On the eve of Congress starting this big debate you've got a horror story of mismanagement and misconduct in programs that are going to be a key part of the discussion," Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in an interview, adding that it can't help but influence the debate.)

Or are you just in denial?

The problems of corruption and malfeasance within MMS were known by Congress, including then-Senator Obama, for at least 4 months before President Obama took office.

What, in the last 20 months, did the Democrat-controlled Congress and Democrat-controlled White House do to solve any of the problems that were identified in the 2008 report?

Nothing. That's what.; 5/26/10, 8:48 PM
garage mahal said...: We need more governmental involvement. Oversight! Government is the answer! Nationalize the wells! Glad to have Republicans on board.; 5/26/10, 8:57 PM
Fen said...: AlphaLibtard: Well, not one conservative has had anything of substance to say here.

Maybe they're just shocked that a shill like you has finally come around to blaming Clinton for 9-11.; 5/26/10, 9:02 PM
Fen said...: Beth doesn't have any time to play politics.

Well, unless you count blaming BP and issuing apologia for Obama.

She has time for that.

Heh. I noticed that too.; 5/26/10, 9:03 PM
Big Mike said...: @Alpha, as sometimes happens you are partly right. Under George W. Bush the MMS was not merely staffed with crooked people, it was incentivized to rubber stamp whatever the oil companies put in front of it.

The MMS was formed in 1982, and absent proof to the contrary, it is perfectly fair to assume that the improper incentives and personal corruption is of long standing. So if you're going to blame Bush, then we get to blame Clinton.

Now let's consider that both Obama, and, more importantly, Ken Salazar -- a notable proponent of renewable energy sources when he was a senator -- did absolutely nothing to correct the known problems of the MMS until after the oil spill. So fixing MMS is something that Obama and Salazar should have done, to be followed up with rigorous verification of compliance with standards for all of America's offshore oil rigs. Only now, over a month after the fire, has Obama ordered a rigorous inspection of the offshore oil rigs. Something he should have done in February 2009.

After the disaster? So far he's made one in-and-out day trip (where he didn't even see the oil slick). He pounded the table and demanded that that somebody "plug that hole." But he's doing nothing to facilitate that, so it's an empty gesture. For that matter, we don't even know that he really did even that -- it's a White House report from a White House that has already established itself as playing fast and loose with the truth. Heck, I can pound a table and yell "plug that hole!" Only I'd let Richard Abbey and Ken Salazar know that their jobs are on the line. Likewise empty pants suit Napolitano, not to mention Admiral Allen.

But there's really no need for us conservatives to "address what Obama has actually done" or what we think Obama should have done.

The point of this thread is that the Talking Skull has done an admirable job of that for us.; 5/26/10, 9:19 PM
Night2night said...: I sometimes despair of our future when a national (well maybe regional) disaster is viewed as another opportunity for political posturing. The number of commenters who view this thread as political theatre far outnumber those focused on the response. Also, in fairness to Beth, who I don't always agree with, a lot of her suggestions have merit and she lives in New Orleans. I think it's likely the impact of this spill on the place she lives in (and obviously loves if you've read her blog) is of more significance to her today than arguing advantages to the Obama administration.; 5/26/10, 9:36 PM
Caroline said...: When Obama is losing the Kos Kids, he's really hitting bottom : "Obama Lied: Used Katrina Myth To Claim Offshore Drilling Safe".

 (Obama lied; seafood died?)

  That's unfair of them, of course. It's not fair to call making a decision based on faulty or inadequate information a lie. But then again, these are the same folks that called Bush a liar re: WMD, even though the conventional wisdom was that Sadam had them. So I gotta give the Kos Kids props for consistency (if nothing else).  

I think Obama made a decision to believe the conventional wisdom regarding the safety of offshore drilling, because it was politically expedient to do so. This article implies his decision to approve more offshore drilling was to make his energy bill more palatable to Republicans. Not a sin... a typical political move- except, of course, he was supposed to be better than that... brilliant even.   

But he wasn't brilliant enough to realize that apparently no one had any plans for how to stop a gushing undersea oil well. But he's not completely to blame for that. Industry regulators should be responsible for that fuck up. There was no contingency plan for this? Really? (Of course I'm no expert on the oil industry, so maybe I am unrealistic to expect a contingency plan for this situation?); 5/26/10, 9:38 PM
Big Mike said...: @Night, but the video posted by the Professor to start this thread is nothing if not political theater.; 5/26/10, 9:40 PM
Caroline said...: As for O's response to the crisis- if there is no workable contingency plan, what can be expected except chaos. If BP incorrectly claimed they initially had it under control, then at most Obama can be faulted for being uninformed and out-of-the-loop to not realize their assessment was wrong.

But once he realized they had no real plan (which should have been obvious real soon), you can fault his lack of decisiveness, as Carville is doing- he needed to get the experts in and decide what needs to be done. His most decisive action was to make sure everyone but himself was blamed.  

Oh, and going on vacation while an ecological disaster with no solution in sight is happening on your watch...probably not a good idea.; 5/26/10, 9:41 PM
AC245 said...: I sometimes despair of our future when a national (well maybe regional) disaster is viewed as another opportunity for political posturing.

Isn't it odd that the people who hate how everything is politicized only feel obliged to speak out when it's Democrats being criticized?

And they always seem to be able to take time out from their "despair" to drop gems like BP's actions were probably negligent and possibly criminal.; 5/26/10, 9:45 PM
Night2night said...: @AC245
I'm a registered Republican and have been since Reagan's second term (I'll claim college brain washing before that). I administered ASME Section XI program in nuclear and have worked in medical device development for the past 15 years (I specialize in risk management and have authored commercial programs in compliance with ISO 14971). I stand by my characterization of BP's actions and their initial public discussion of their internal actions would seem to support my observations.

If you want to amuse people with satire and snark that's a fine end in itself online and is difficult to do well. However, that does not make other commenters on this board props for your theatre.; 5/26/10, 9:55 PM
jr565 said...: Heckuva Job Brownie
(Sorry couldn't resist).; 5/26/10, 10:02 PM
AC245 said...: Night2night, you fully have the right to make whatever comment you want, on whatever topic you want, in whatever manner you want (within Althouse's comment rules, at least on this blog).

You even have the right to chastise the rest of the commentariat for behaving the same way you've behaved, in the very same thread you've exhibited the behaviour.

You do not, however, have the right to not be called out when you do so.; 5/26/10, 10:09 PM
Beth said...: Anyone who says I'm blaming one party and defending another reveals a very poor reading comprehension, that or just a generally shallow character. It's unfortunate that the oil leak is apparently a source of great amusement for a few idiots.; 5/26/10, 10:11 PM
jr565 said...: Alpha Liberal wrote:
By all means please explain what any President is supposed to do to plug a leak once it has been created by criminal negligence, slipshod and rushed drilling practices, and lax to incestuous regulation?

Ah, remember the good old days of Katrina where the liberals were blaming Bush because the levee was breached and Bush KNEW it was breached (as opposed to overtopped which happens in all hurricanes). As if Bush could do anything about it even if he knew it was overopped. And remember when the left was blaming Bush for not putting enough money into the levees, as if he was personally responsible for how money was misspent in New Orleans by corrupt DEMOCRAT officials. Remember how he DELIBERATELY sat on his hands because he "didn't care for black people" and we needed to have national dialogues about race? Remember all the caterwauling from the left how he deliberately let people die, was slow on the job didn't care, played guitar while New Orleans drowned. Despite the fact that it was in fact the largest rescue effort ever attempted with the most resources EVER pumped into the area in a short period of time by the govt. In other words, the narrative of the left and the media was to distort what happened simply to hammer Bush.
Why should you then expect the right to not jump in and have some fun at Obama's expense since all is fair on your side. Obama doesn't care for white people or the environment. Obama sat on his hands and had vacations and ignored this for a month when he had to know oil was being pumped into the Gulf for that long. And he did nothing. Obama was the largest beneficiary of BP funds of any politician. Maybe he was too busy collecting thier money to care about how well they did their jobs. Heckuva job.
How do you like it Alpha? Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
But it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of demagogues then Obama and the lefties. Hope it drops his poll numbers another 10 points.; 5/26/10, 10:12 PM
AC245 said...: BP has to provide those tankers and they have not. It's not profitable to have a tanker sucking up spilt oil and not transporting usable oil.

There are miles of wetlands right now that have oil coming in and BP has sent no cleanup crews.

There are boats and fisherman standing by, more than 100, that BP interviewed and trained but have not mobilized with boom, with hay, with any materials. They've been told to just hang on.

All of this has to be paid for by BP, and they're stalling.

God, I can't imagine where I got the impression you were blaming BP, Beth. I'm so sorry.; 5/26/10, 10:18 PM
Night2night said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 5/26/10, 10:29 PM
Night2night said...: @AC245

I'll probably wind up regretting this, but I really don't understand your retort. You claim I indulged in behavior I chastised other commenters for. From my perspective you assumed a number of things about me which are not substantiated by one fact about me. I corrected your misassumptions and repeated my orignal observations. I do not believe I've made one comment on this topic which insists political calculations are primary to this event (I can't claim the same for you). If anything your comment to me validates my original observation.

I don't think companies are bad, but companies are comprised of people and people can do the wrong thing. For a long time, I've worked on finding ways to convince people to do things which may hurt their short term financial interests. I suspect the pressure to get things online led BP personnel to make "bad" decisions. "Bad" decisions result in bad outcomes. This was not an "act of God".; 5/26/10, 10:48 PM
Beth said...: AC, are you saying BP bears no blame? That's just foolish. I listed a number of things that could and ought to be being done, and commented on the roles of BP, the feds, the state and the local parishes, in that clusterfuck.

You seem to have a desire for a neat little division of blame where there's a single good guy doing well and a single bad guy not doing well. That's stupid, and shallow.; 5/26/10, 10:49 PM
AC245 said...: I didn't assume anything about you, Night2night. I relied on the information available to me in the comments you've left here.

At 12:16PM you assert that BP's actions were probably negligent and possibly criminal.

At 9:36PM You despair of our future when a national (well maybe regional) disaster is viewed as another opportunity for political posturing.

At 10:29 PM, you suspect the pressure to get things online led BP personnel to make "bad" decisions. "Bad" decisions result in bad outcomes. This was not an "act of God".

Perhaps you might argue that your comments don't qualify as "political posturing" because they demonize a company and its workers rather than a government agency or a politician, but that's not an argument I think has much merit.; 5/26/10, 10:50 PM
AC245 said...: Beth, of course you haven't blamed BP in almost every. single. comment. you've made on this topic.

It's simply my very poor reading comprehension and generally shallow character that led me to think that.

You're obviously too focused on finding a solution to have time to point fingers.; 5/26/10, 10:55 PM
Beth said...: AC, of course I do blame BP. And I haven't denied doing so. There's no point in responding to you since your point is to distort and lie. I see that now after reading back through your other comments in the thread, including your interaction with night2night. You're a little troll. For the life of me, I have never figured out what makes that enjoyable.; 5/26/10, 11:19 PM
AC245 said...: Beth, I've distorted nothing you've said, nor have I lied about anything you said.; 5/26/10, 11:23 PM
Night2night said...: @AC245

OK, I'll continue to play (but then some sleep). Reaching conclusions thru other's statement of facts is not demonizing, nor political posturing; in my world it's generally considered rational judgement. On the other hand, insistence upon being correct when the facts argue otherwise is not political posturing either; its usually egotism.

On the particulars in this case, I currently believe BP personnel and it's subcontractors failure to exercise due diligence has resulted in this incident. The strongest evidence I've seen is excusions in wellhead riser pressure 5 hours before the initial explosion, a failure to verify operation of the blowout preventer at wellhead design conditions, and failure to both test and maintain those system necessary for the blowout preventer stack to operate when needed. These are facts AC, not attempts to demonize.

Again, this was my original point. We can't allow our desire for politically convenient conclusions to blind us to reality. Ultimatedly, if we can't reach agreement on criteria for reacting to empirical evidence, we will simply descend into tribalism. Is that what you really want?; 5/27/10, 1:08 AM
miller said...: Some robot posted:

" [What Bambi has done to stop the oil from flowing]
* Mobilized Coast Guard.
* Established joint command center
* Established commission to investigate.
* Set a moratorium on further permitting and new well expansion.
* Recommended reform of the MMS office.
* Calling for support for clean energy legislation to get us off the oil addiction.
* Start a DHS-DOI investigation into causes of the spill.
* mobilized many federal agencies.
* Various other things you guys will dishonestly ignore. "

I see someone else has posted the exquisite response that NONE OF THESE ARE ACTIONS AND NONE OF THEM ARE STOPPING THE OIL FROM GUSHING FROM A WELL OWNED BY A COMPANY THAT'S IN BAMBI'S POCKET.

However, I will point out that at long last (I'm slow on these things) I've realized that AL is really a Moby. Because no one who was an honest Democrat could, with a straight face, post a list of bureaucratic listmaking as the equivalent of "action" by the man who is the FREAKING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

I know.

It's still all Bush's fault. I get that. I really do.

But still, the question is, WHAT IS BAMBI ACTUALLY *DOING* ABOUT THIS?

I hate to use the All Caps Stun Gun, but c'mon, is this the best you can do? Any liberals here embarrassed by this non-sequitur?; 5/27/10, 1:43 AM
miller said...: Here's the problem: BP shares the blame with the government. But BP will get all the penalties, and will become poorer (and perhaps rightfully so), and the government will be rewarded by growing even bigger. To the government, size = competence.

And it's a safe bet that almost nothing the government does to "resolve" this issue will, you know, actually do anything close to "action" to resolve the problem.

In the end, some commission will release its report, there will be strong words and finger-pointing by the Infant-in-Chief, and we will just sit back and wait for the next disaster.

Too bad we didn't have some white cops beating black oil rig workers. Now that could have been a moment for a national discussion on race.; 5/27/10, 2:00 AM
Fen said...: Hey Alpha, if Bush is responsible for something that happened 18 months into Obama administraion, how is it that Clinton is not responsible for something that happened 9 months into the Bush administration?

Maybe you need to create another alias here, so you can maintain both positions without your head exploding.; 5/27/10, 8:02 AM
former law student said...: I bought a Golf TDI (diesel) in 2003, the last year that VW was allowed to sell them in CA.

You can buy a Golf TDI (diesel) again this year in California. You could have bought a Jetta TDI last year -- Jettas far outsell Golfs in California, so they put the BIN5/LEV2 compliant engine in the Jetta first.; 5/27/10, 9:10 AM
former law student said...: if Bush is responsible for something that happened 18 months into Obama administraion, how is it that Clinton is not responsible for something that happened 9 months into the Bush administration?

The dangers of BP's drilling in the Tibor oil field should have been obvious to the Bush administration, because Bush's MMS leased the field to BP, because oil rigs have failed before, and because the environmental effects of catastrophic oil spill of the Exxon Valdez are burned into our brains.

While the dangers of Muslims attending flight school in the U.S. could not have been obvious to the Clinton administration, because for decades, people from all over the world have come to learn to fly in the U.S., without catastrophe.; 5/27/10, 9:23 AM
Saint Croix said...: thought for the day: Right-wingers are better in government because the press is liberal and challenges them all the time. Liberals suck in government because the press is liberal and ignores all their screw-ups for far too long.

Blame the press. Carville's rant is like a month overdue.; 5/27/10, 11:08 AM
howzerdo said...: roesch-voltaire: I'm late to the party, but I am curious how you reconcile your green values with a trip to Europe?; 5/27/10, 1:53 PM
AC245 said...: Night2night, you repeatedly avoid addressing my actual comments. It's tedious trying to have a discussion with you when you keep trying to rewrite the entire conversation on each interaction, so I think this will be my last response to you.

I'll simply reiterate what I said at 10:09PM:
Night2night, you fully have the right to make whatever comment you want, on whatever topic you want, in whatever manner you want (within Althouse's comment rules, at least on this blog).

You even have the right to chastise the rest of the commentariat for behaving the same way you've behaved, in the very same thread you've exhibited the behaviour.

You do not, however, have the right to not be called out when you do so.

You may now return to your regularly-scheduled bemoaning of how everyone else whose opinion of a situation differs from yours is a politically posturing, warring tribalist for daring to speak on the subject.; 5/27/10, 2:16 PM
jr565 said...: Alpha Liberal wrote:
1) Bush took no action on terrorism even after being repeatedly ignored. Obama has already taken action on the MMS.

2) Bush was warned on August 6, 2001 in the Presidential Daily titled "bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US." He took NO action (went off to cut wood).
Bush took NO action on terrorism?! What have the left been arguing about for the past 8 years about Bush turning this country into nazi germany.
It's so funny that prior to Bush taking actions against terrorism, all the liberals were runnig around like Richard Clarke's about terrorism being the biggest threat. Then once Bush takes action vis a vis terrorism, the lbersals all run around saying "What threat, there is no threat, more people die in car accidents, Bush overreacted, lied etc." Not to mention, every time there was an elevation of an alert level the left suggested that Bush was ruling based on fear and hyping the threat. Some even suggested that Bush had OBL captured and was merely waiting for the election to spring an october surprise.
But as far as the warning that Bush got - how was that in any way actionable? It said Al Qaeda was determined to attack the US. It didn't say how, when or where. It's like saying Gang Members are determined to sell drugs. No shit sherlock!No one needed to or needs to receive such a report to know that that is a fact. They declared a fatwah on us in 1998. I can tell you right now, Al Qaeda is determined to attack the US or it's interests eiher in the us or in the world. But if my report said things to that effect those reading it would perhaps remark on the obviousness of the post and then move on to more pressing matters. If the report said, Al Qaeda determined to attack the US using hijacked planes sometime in September then I can see people doing something. But the report issue provide zero actionable intel. So what did you want Bush to do. Start rounding up muslims, implementing the Patriot Act, breaking down the wall of silence set up by Clinton's admins when all he had was a warming that Al Qaeda was pissed at us and was going to do something sometime somewhere? Give me a break.

Though if Bush did do the things that the left said that he should have done it would have been along the lines of implementing a patriot act, increasing airport security, setting up secret programs to track Al Qaeda's money. In other words, all the things that the left pilloried Bush for for 8 years.; 5/27/10, 7:04 PM
jr565 said...: Alpha Liberal wrote:
Yes, we agree that Bush did not cause Hurricane Katrina. His great failing was because he ignored the warnings he had in the days before it hit. After it hit, he did not pay attention, either.

Bull. The idea that he did not pay attention is a complete fallacy pushed by the media and liberals like yourself out to demonize Bush. This was one of the worst natural disasters ever faced by this country and Bush and co. poured more resources, money manpower into dealing with Katrina than had ever been allocated towards a natural disaster. Was it messy? Of course, but what do you expect with THE BIGGEST NATURAL DISASTER this country has ever faced. And despite the suggestion that he moved slow, the rescue effort was able to rescue and then move hundreds of thouands of people into adjoining states in the span of two weeks. That is some feet. And despite all the caterwauling to the contrary, it was one of the most remarkable rescue jobs ever undertaken, not one of the worst.
And this was because the media parked down in front of the metrodome and simply ignored all the rescue efforst that were being undertaken on day one. People in the metrodome had food on day one and had shelter. Getting them whisked out of there was not as important in the first few days as say, rescuing people trapped on their roofs or in their homes, and the Coast Guard was doing that again on day one, with absolutely zero reportage of the effort by the media. They were too busy making up stories about looting and shooting at helicopters and deaths in the metrodome and cannibalism and whether Bush knew the levees were breached as opposed to overtopped.
These type of incidents are never pretty, and the bigger the disaster the more mistakes will be made. That doesn't take anything away from the effort put into Katrina by Bush. Your lies only show you have zero comprehension about what to realistically expect during a natural disaster let alone THE BIGGEST NATURAL DISASTER that this country faced.

For some good reporting on this I refer you to Lou Dolinar, who cut through the bull and actually wrote about what really happened.
Start here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/katrina_what_the_media_missed.html

http://dolinar.com/column/politics/superdome.html; 5/27/10, 9:27 PM