What does everyone think about the oil spills?

It is an interesting issue. To me, it appears as though he has followed the same protocol of every President before him to wit: he visits the area, declares it a disaster, makes some speeches, has his staff mobilize resources, then makes more speeches on how it can be prevented in the future, and looks to enact legislation. I don't know what more he can do that would have an immediate and direct impact on the spill.

Rather than hold him responsible for BP's screw up we should insist that congress who were the ones responsible for lowering the standards and let the oil companies do as they wanted to do should pass laws to stop this from happening again and fund the people who will have to enforce the laws passed. Not another Bush unfunded prescription plan screw up!

Rather than hold him responsible for BP's screw up we should hold him responsible
for his own presidential screw-ups ... PrezBO has totally screwed-up this disaster.

I'm curious...how has he screwed up? I'm not saying he hasn't, maybe you are more in tune with the information out there.

You must be new to this site. Okie, ican, and waterman post the same thing time after time.

You are truly ignorant.

You are wrong boy, you, rabel and your fellow Obamabots that are the ignorant ones.

His response time sucked and instead of threatening to sue and promising restitution he should have
formed a Manhattan style project by assembling a large group of specialist to come up with viable solutions.

Maybe I'm wrong, but someone tell me of anything he has done right since the event took place some 60+ days ago?

Seems obvious enough that when something goes seriously wrong 5000' beneath the waves it's awfully hard to do much about it.

Also I don't seem to be reading anything about right-wing republican green freaks forcing anybody to go out that deep to drill for oil that deep or suing everybody who ever tries to get at oil (which we have in abundance) which is easier to get at than that.

Am I missing anything there??

You do realize how long it took for the Manhattan project to produce a working bomb, don't you?

You also realize how long it took to get to the moon after Kennedy first announced that goal, don't you?

No maybe about it squirt. You are wrong. A Manhattan project wouldn't have produced anything in 60 days, let alone 6 months.

SO, you are arguing that the government is better at something than private business since he left BP in charge of stopping the leak? A rather interesting stance on your part squirt.

You are missing the fact that 80% of the oil in the gulf is in water that deep so BP was going to drill there no matter what.

One other thing Larry Kudlow made this morning is that BP has had some 700 safety violations over the last few years and every other oil company is under ten i.e. that BP really is a sort of a rogue company.

@rabel22,

Thanks for the heads up. And yes, I am new.

@H2O,

I'm curious, how do you think the President goes about forming a team of specialists from around the world? I have seen it in the movies as a meteor screams towards earth, but because movies last all of 2 hours they tend to cut out quite a bit. If you were President how would you make that happen? Would you go on national television, twitter, etc. and just announce to the world you are looking for world experts on the topic? Given you are the President and probably don't know jack about oil spills taking place at 5000 feet, how would you screen the potentially tens of thousands of applicants in a matter of a few days? How would you deal with BP as they pull together their own team of specialists?

Kudlow is an idiot if he said that gunga and he doesn't know the difference between a safety violation and an egregious willful citation.


BP knowingly allowed unsafe conditions. Other companies pretended they didn't know about the unsafe conditions at their facilities while having more safety violations.

by not jumping onto the immediate need

So if you were President, (1) how do you determine there is an immediate need and how would you proceed to jump on that immediate need? What action would you take?

Not jumping on what need?

1. BP was supposed to stop the leak
2. BP said they were working on stopping the leak.
3. BP was actively doing things to try to stop the leak

Are you arguing that the President should have realized that BP would have an issue stopping the leak?
Are you also arguing that the President would have been able to better supply a way to stop the leak than BP?
On what do you base any answer to the above?

<reading along, and wanting to welcome Dr. Dick to the forum a little belatedly>

Dont you know that the president is omnipotent. HE WAS SUPPOSED TO SAY LET THERE BE A PLUG AND END THE LEAK IN SECONDS!