President Toonces should resign over February 13th

[fossten]

Kevin McCullough

- FOXNews.com

- June 21, 2010

Resign... or Change, Mr. President

It now appears that the White House knew about problems in the Gulf two months before the Deepwater Horizon explosion on April 20. What did the administration know? Why didn't they shut down the well?

While defending his own policies President Obama has routinely been rude and sarcastic to his predecessor, George W. Bush. Yet Obama appears to be making the resident of the previous White House look like a genius compared to his own serious missteps in office.

Case in point – Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's performance and the communication of priorities on the issue of oil rig safety in the Gulf of Mexico.

It seems incomprehensible that the president and other members of the administration still have jobs when it is now being reported that the federal government was apprised by BP on February 13 that the Deepwater Horizon oil rig was leaking oil and natural gas into the ocean floor.

In fact, according to documents in the administration's possession, BP was fighting large cracks at the base of the well for roughly ten days in early February.

Further it seems the administration was also informed about this development, six weeks before to the rig's fatal explosion when an engineer from the University of California, Berkeley, announced to the world a near miss of an explosion on the rig by stating, "They damn near blew up the rig."

It's also now being reported that BP was asking for the administration's help on this matter long before the deadly accident and the now gushing well of tar.

Which leads me to some questions for the president. If I were in front row of reporters in the White House briefing room, here’s what I’d like to know:

1. It appears, Mr. President, that you were informed by BP about problems on Deepwater Horizon on February 13 and the company wanted your help. What did you say?

2. Given this new revelation, Mr. President, how can you can sleep at night knowing that your inaction cost the lives of eleven men in Louisiana?

3. Did you inform the victims' families about these facts when you invited them to the White House for last month's photo op?

4. You've said, Mr. President, time and again, that the buck stops with you. Doesn’t that statement seem like something bordering on propaganda when you follow it up with what appears to be a false sense of outrage by telling Matt Lauer that you're looking for rear ends to kick?

5. Does the buck stop with you… or not?

6. Are you going to insist that Mr. Salazar step down from his post in disgrace and shame?

7. Will you hold another prime time television press conference and tell the entire truth to the American people? -- These would be the actions of a man who says that the buck "stops" with him.

8. I know when this news was breaking midday on Saturday about the latest BP developments that you and the Vice President were out on the golf course. Was it 39th or 40th time you've played a round in 18 months? (Just for a point of reference President Bush played golf 24 times in eight years.) Never mind, your priorities are for you to decide. At least until election night...

And now here's where I would not be able to stop myself from saying more...

It is one thing, Mr. President, to be forced to deal with unexpected circumstances and to have to deal with genuinely new problems. President Bush sure had to. He had to respond to an attack on our homeland that took the lives of 3,000 of our fellow citizens. But on his watch no other terrorist actions took lives of Americans on our soil, largely due to his steadfast leadership and willingness to accept no excuses on the matter.

But Mr. President, you seem to have very little leadership experience and it appears you have even less skill. Being a good dad and nice guy who sees the world as he wishes it to be is not exactly a resume of exacting leadership.

Your advisers have failed you and you have failed the American people on nearly everything we've asked of you.

Where you go from here is really your call, but you should consider two options if you genuinely love the country you work for and those of us you report to.

First, change your tactics. Second, appear to care. Attempt to engage and empower Americans who can and will go solve this mess.

Otherwise resign.

For the good of the nation, for your own children's future, change your patterns or change your path... but change!

You do remember that word don't you, Mr. President?

 

[Calabrio]

...it's at this point that either Obama's administration becomes completely impotent or extremely dangerous.

 

[mmtphoto]

Both outstanding posts-thanks

 

[Marcus]

What a load of bullsh!t.

It seems incomprehensible that the president and other members of the administration still have jobs when it is now being reported that the federal government was apprised by BP on February 13 that the Deepwater Horizon oil rig was leaking oil and natural gas into the ocean floor.

In fact, according to documents in the administration's possession, BP was fighting large cracks at the base of the well for roughly ten days in early February.

OK, let's start with Mr. McCullough's source for this, which he didn't link to because it would expose his hyped-up conclusions for what they are:

Cracks Show BP Was Battling Gulf Well as Early as February

On Feb. 13, BP told the minerals service it was trying to seal cracks in the well about 40 miles (64 kilometers) off the Louisiana coast, drilling documents obtained by Bloomberg show. Investigators are still trying to determine whether the fissures played a role in the disaster.

‘Cement Squeeze’

The company attempted a “cement squeeze,” which involves pumping cement to seal the fissures, according to a well activity report. Over the following week the company made repeated attempts to plug cracks that were draining expensive drilling fluid, known as “mud,” into the surrounding rocks.

BP used three different substances to plug the holes before succeeding, the documents show. ​

So BP sent a memo to the MMS, which is certainly part of the federal government, but a tiny one at that. But it's a long cry from "the administration". Is "the administration" supposed to monitor all ten million emails that all the government agencies generate on a daily basis?

Since Bloomberg hasn't released the documents, we have absolutely no idea how severe a problem it was at the time, but it says they got it under control. Nevertheless, this Bloomberg article suggests that these things are not uncommon.

Energy XXI, along with partners that included Nexen Inc., spent $75 million to bring a June 2007 blowout at the Cote de Mer field in Louisiana under control. A surge of gas in the 22,261-foot well blew through a device known as a blowout preventer, burying the rig floor in six feet of sand, rock and seashells. No one was injured, the company said. ​

So by Mr. McCullough's twisted logic, we should blame Bush because he didn't do anything about the June 2007 blowout.

From the first article:

While gas surges are common in oil drilling, companies have abandoned wells if they determine the risk is too high. When a Gulf well known as Blackbeard threatened to blow out in 2006, Exxon Mobil Corp. shut the project down. ​

So while other companies back off of a well that is in danger of a blowout, BP goes full speed ahead.

Further it seems the administration was also informed about this development, six weeks before to the rig's fatal explosion when an engineer from the University of California, Berkeley, announced to the world a near miss of an explosion on the rig by stating, "They damn near blew up the rig."

This is a patently false statement. The quote is from the professor as he was interviewed for the Bloomberg article in the present day. He didn't announce anything to the world ahead of time:

The incident was a “showstopper,” said Robert Bea, an engineering professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who has consulted with the Interior Department on offshore drilling safety. “They damn near blew up the rig.” ​

It's also now being reported that BP was asking for the administration's help on this matter long before the deadly accident and the now gushing well of tar.
...
1. It appears, Mr. President, that you were informed by BP about problems on Deepwater Horizon on February 13 and the company wanted your help. What did you say?

Where, Mr. McCullough did you get this zinger? There is absolutely no evidence at all that BP asked either MMS or "the administration" for help. If he has the evidence, he hasn't provided it. That's because there isn't any.

On March 10. 2010. BP and the MMS had this email exchange (go to the bottom and work up).

In the first email, BP exec Douglas Scherie writes to MMS drilling engineer Frank Patton:

Frank,

We are in the midst of a well control situation on MC 252 #001 and have stuck pipe. We are bringing out equipment to begin operations to sever the drillpipe, plugback the well and bypass.
...
The BOP [Blow Off Preventer] test is due tomorrow. We would like to set the plugs (2) after we kill the well and then test BOPs per the procedure in the APM. Please advise if this is acceptable.​

Further up the email chain we learn that the drill bit has gotten stuck below a vein of rock ("stringer"), and that they want to delay the BOP test until they can put the plugs in place. At first the Patton denies their extension request, but later that same day grants the extension. There is no evidence of an emergency at this time, and no mention of problems in the past. The emails seems to be pretty routine.

These documents do nothing to implicate "the administration", they are damning evidence that BP knew they had a dangerous well with a high risk of blowout, but went ahead with the drilling anyway.


Kevin McCullough's screed has almost no basis in truth, and comes to ridiculous conclusions that only people who don't check facts and hate Obama would believe. In other words, the core Fox News audience. There is zero evidence that Obama knew a thing about any gulf oil well problems before April. McCullough needs to go back to his little blog on townhall.com and stop damaging Fox News' already tiny credibility.

 

[cammerfe]

Hoop-La

Marcus, your entire tirade boils down to, "I don't believe it." And "They haven't proved it."

I DID have dinner tonight, although I haven't cited any proof. We understand that you think Obummer is King S H I T. Now go away with your harangue.
KS

 

[foxpaws]

Actually - if you read this article - which has additional source (a 60 minutes story) - it sheds a different light on the same source - the Bloomburg article. However, ituses actual quotes from the Bloomburg article and isn't afraid to link it as well (unlike McCullough).

Mike Williams, the chief electronics technician on the Deepwater Horizon, and one of the last workers to leave the doomed rig] said they were told it would take 21 days; according to him, it actually took six weeks.

With the schedule slipping, Williams says a BP manager ordered a faster pace.

"And he requested to the driller, 'Hey, let's bump it up. Let's bump it up.' And what he was talking about there is he's bumping up the rate of penetration. How fast the drill bit is going down," Williams said.

Williams says going faster caused the bottom of the well to split open, swallowing tools and that drilling fluid called "mud."

"We actually got stuck. And we got stuck so bad we had to send tools down into the drill pipe and sever the pipe," Williams explained.

That well was abandoned and Deepwater Horizon had to drill a new route to the oil. It cost BP more than two weeks and millions of dollars.

"We were informed of this during one of the safety meetings, that somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 million was lost in bottom hole assembly and 'mud.' And you always kind of knew that in the back of your mind when they start throwing these big numbers around that there was gonna be a push coming, you know? A push to pick up production and pick up the pace," Williams said.

Asked if there was pressure on the crew after this happened, Williams told Pelley, "There's always pressure, but yes, the pressure was increased."

But the trouble was just beginning: when drilling resumed, Williams says there was an accident on the rig that has not been reported before. He says, four weeks before the explosion, the rig's most vital piece of safety equipment was damaged.

As Bloomberg reports today, problems at the well actually started in February:

BP Plc was struggling to seal cracks in its Macondo well as far back as February, more than two months before an explosion killed 11 and spewed oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

It took 10 days to plug the first cracks, according to reports BP filed with the Minerals Management Service that were later delivered to congressional investigators. Cracks in the surrounding rock continued to complicate the drilling operation during the ensuing weeks. Left unsealed, they can allow explosive natural gas to rush up the shaft.

“Once they realized they had oil down there, all the decisions they made were designed to get that oil at the lowest cost,” said Peter Galvin of the Center for Biological Diversity, which has been working with congressional investigators probing the disaster. “It’s been a doomed voyage from the beginning.” ​

BP reported the problem to Minerals Management - however, they also reported that they fixed the problem... Perhaps they lied or glossed over the problem.

I really don't see how the 'administration' was advised of this problem from the evidence presented in the article. Is the White House also advised when there is a crack in a natural gas well in Wyoming - Does Obama get memos on the downed power lines in North Dakota?

 

[Marcus]

Marcus, your entire tirade boils down to, "I don't believe it." And "They haven't proved it."

I DID have dinner tonight, although I haven't cited any proof. We understand that you think Obummer is King S H I T. Now go away with your harangue.
KS

And McCullough's entire tirade boils down to two arguments.

1. The 'administration' knew about the problems they were having at the well in February.
2. BP asked for help and none was provided.

He provides no evidence of #2 at all. Zero. Zilch. Nada. If it were true, don't you think someone from BP would have mentioned it by now?

He equates email exchanges between BP and a low-level government agency with 'the administration knew', when all evidence suggests that those messages never made it out of the MMS. The Bloomberg article doesn't say anything about the problem being escalated up the chain of command, much less the White House.

It's not up to me to "prove" the article is untrue, it's up to the author to "prove" it is true. He hasn't. All he offers is a willfully distorted interpretation of an article from a reputable news organization, which, when read in its entirety, supports none of his absurd conclusions. If he has additional sources, he's not sharing it with his readers. Hell, he didn't even provide a link to his primary source, because it would undercut the BS he was spewing.

I don't think Obummer is King S H I T, but I understand that you think he is S H I T. That's all right-wing hacks like Kevin McCullough need in a reader. You'll believe anything you read if it makes Obama look bad. But to those of us who occupy the world of reality, garbage like this propaganda piece is infuriating.

Now go away with your gullibility.

 

[fossten]

Marcus: Author's a liar!

Foxpaws: Hey, look over here!

Typical.

Where there's smoke there's fire. If you believe Obama didn't know about this in Feb, you're naive. Same people blame Bush for Abu Ghraib. Same people say Bush should have known about 9/11 based on reports they were getting.

It's also interesting that Goldman Sachs (who is in bed with Captain Kickass) sold half its BP stock just before the explosion. Somebody knew something, obviously.

Moreover, it's puzzling why you, Marcus, aren't interested in whether or not King Cokehead actually knew. Wouldn't this be an important question for President Toonces to answer? Here's another one - why are you sending $2 Billion to Brazil to drill in the same waters that you are fighting to prevent the United States from drilling in?

Everything about Captain Kickass should be suspect at this point. Amazing how you defend this Liar in Chief:

"No one earning less than $250K per year will see their taxes go up one dime...Health reform will make costs go down...You can all keep your health care program...We will have no lobbyists in this new administration...All laws will be on the internet for at least 5 days before votes ar taken...No more backroom deal making...Health reform debates will be on C-Span for everyone to see...Afghanistan is the war we must win....A nuclear Iran is unacceptable...We support Israel's right to exist...Everything is George Bush's fault...Oh, yeah, I didn't know anything about the BP problem and Senator Kyl is lying."

 

[taylor414ce2003]

What should he have done if he knew about a leak? Are your saying that you are for the feds stepping in and controlling private corporations

 

[Marcus]

What should he have done if he knew about a leak? Are your saying that you are for the feds stepping in and controlling private corporations

Isn't it obvious from all the vast evidence Fossten has collected that Obama WANTED the explosion to happen? Jeez.

 

[fossten]

Isn't it obvious from all the vast evidence Fossten has collected that Obama WANTED the explosion to happen? Jeez.

Straw man, thy name is TommyB (Marcus).

But:

You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. - Rahm Emanuel

 

[foxpaws]

Marcus: Author's a liar!

Foxpaws: Hey, look over here!

Typical.

Where there's smoke there's fire. If you believe Obama didn't know about this in Feb, you're naive. Same people blame Bush for Abu Ghraib. Same people say Bush should have known about 9/11 based on reports they were getting.

So, why would Obama have known about this in February - there is no evidence that indicates he would have. The problems with Deepwater Horizon were not 'new' or 'out of the ordinary' for drilling. They have solutions - quick setting cement, Blow-Offs, capping, etc, because this has happened in the past and will happen in the future. Cracks occur, natural gas seepage is common, none of this was 'rocket science' to Transocean or BP.

Plus, Minerals Management was told that the problem had been fixed. Should the President of the United States know of the drilling status of all wells, of the problems with those wells and what is happening to correct the problems at all the wells. Of course not. How about the status of all the large jets, what their maintenance records are, how likely are they to fail in flight? Loss of life when a large jetliner goes down is more than 11. There are lots of man made disasters. For example the coal mine collapse earlier this year which claimed more lives. Should the president of the United States be appraised daily of the safety of all the mines in the US, the likelihood of collapse or fire within those mines? Of course not.

And in this case - even if for some bizarre reason the President of the United States is required to keep 'on top' of the status of every drilling rig in the United States, on February 23rd he would have been notified that the problem had been corrected. Case closed.

How much government do you want on the rigs? They run into problems all the time. Oil drilling is hardly an exact science. Good companies fix the problem correctly, or shut down the well. BP and TransOcean happened to be 'bad companies' in this instance. They didn't fix the problem correctly, and they should have shut down the well. However, so much money was at stake, they weighed the options and decided to proceed. I believe Deepwater Horizon runs at about $1/2 million a day. Those types of costs run up fast, and BP wanted to mitigate the time on the rig. Shutting down the operation already cost them $25 million with an earlier problem when they had to cap one hole and start another.

So, do you want government employees and agencies on the rigs at all times monitoring everything that goes on with the ability to shut down the operation as soon as something goes wrong? Drilling would come to a halt. Now.

At the time when Deepwater Horizon went down there were almost 500 rigs in the Gulf, with over 3,600 active wells.

 

[fossten]

What should he have done if he knew about a leak? Are your saying that you are for the feds stepping in and controlling private corporations

You mean like he's already done, by putting a moratorium on ALL drilling in the gulf? No, I'm not for that. Let me explain since you obviously only have one mental gear to use for this issue.

If the oil is only on the water's surface, eventually it will evaporate, but if it hits the coastline, you have a REAL ecological disaster.

It's the President's responsibility to protect our shores. That means getting everything in place to prevent oil from reaching LA and FL beaches. We're in the FIFTH MONTH of this, and still President Toonces has failed - NO - REFUSED! to protect our coastline. The Dutch have offered to help, Britain has offered to help, private companies here in the US have offered help, and Toonces instead hits the golf course. He turned away the Dutch and the Brits because he wants to let the UNIONS have first crack at this - helloooooo all you HalliburtonBushCheney bashers! Bobby Jindal is at his wits' end, having repeatedly and loudly asked Zero for help in protecting the shore, and NOTHING from Cokehead. Either he's COMPLETELY incompetent or he really does hate America and wants this disaster to continue.

Probably both - after all, that's what you get when you hire a community agitator to run a government - failure.

 

[fossten]

So, why would Obama have known about this in February - there is no evidence that indicates he would have. The problems with Deepwater Horizon were not 'new' or 'out of the ordinary' for drilling. They have solutions - quick setting cement, Blow-Offs, capping, etc, because this has happened in the past and will happen in the future. Cracks occur, natural gas seepage is common, none of this was 'rocket science' to Transocean or BP.

Plus, Minerals Management was told that the problem had been fixed. Should the President of the United States know of the drilling status of all wells, of the problems with those wells and what is happening to correct the problems at all the wells. Of course not. How about the status of all the large jets, what their maintenance records are, how likely are they to fail in flight? Loss of life when a large jetliner goes down is more than 11. There are lots of man made disasters. For example the coal mine collapse earlier this year which claimed more lives. Should the president of the United States be appraised daily of the safety of all the mines in the US, the likelihood of collapse or fire within those mines? Of course not.

And in this case - even if for some bizarre reason the President of the United States is required to keep 'on top' of the status of every drilling rig in the United States, on February 23rd he would have been notified that the problem had been corrected. Case closed.

How much government do you want on the rigs? They run into problems all the time. Oil drilling is hardly an exact science. Good companies fix the problem correctly, or shut down the well. BP and TransOcean happened to be 'bad companies' in this instance. They didn't fix the problem correctly, and they should have shut down the well. However, so much money was at stake, they weighed the options and decided to proceed. I believe Deepwater Horizon runs at about $1/2 million a day. Those types of costs run up fast, and BP wanted to mitigate the time on the rig. Shutting down the operation already cost them $25 million with an earlier problem when they had to cap one hole and start another.

So, do you want government employees and agencies on the rigs at all times monitoring everything that goes on with the ability to shut down the operation as soon as something goes wrong? Drilling would come to a halt. Now.

At the time when Deepwater Horizon went down there were almost 500 rigs in the Gulf, with over 3,600 active wells.

Uh, well he IS the Messiah. He SAID he would not rest until this disaster was cleaned up. He WANTS to control everything. He SHOULD know about it. And I believe he did.

And if this is such a mundane problem as you try to characterize it, then why BAN all drilling? Isn't that like banning airplane flights because of one crash? Why yes, it is.

 

[foxpaws]

Uh, well he IS the Messiah. He SAID he would not rest until this disaster was cleaned up. He WANTS to control everything. He SHOULD know about it. And I believe he did.

And if this is such a mundane problem as you try to characterize it, then why BAN all drilling? Isn't that like banning airplane flights because of one crash? Why yes, it is.

When a plane has what appears to be a structural or engineering problem, they do ground all the similar planes Foss.

Why do you believe Obama knew of this one instance 5 months ago? Is it just a 'feeling'? Do you really think he is informed on the drilling status on all the wells in the United States? Once again, problems like this aren't uncommon, and there are solutions for it. And even if he 'knew' of this problem, would he have reason to not believe BP when they told Minerals Management that they had solved the problem?

This is one of the greatest leaps of logic I have ever seen by McCullough. I realize Obama bashing is now a national past time - but in this case, there isn't any evidence whatsoever that backs up his claims.

 

[fossten]

When a plane has what appears to be a structural or engineering problem, they do ground all the similar planes Foss.

Why do you believe Obama knew of this one instance 5 months ago? Is it just a 'feeling'? Do you really think he is informed on the drilling status on all the wells in the United States? Once again, problems like this aren't uncommon, and there are solutions for it. And even if he 'knew' of this problem, would he have reason to not believe BP when they told Minerals Management that they had solved the problem?

This is one of the greatest leaps of logic I have ever seen by McCullough. I realize Obama bashing is now a national past time - but in this case, there isn't any evidence whatsoever that backs up his claims.

No they don't. The FEDS don't ground EVERY PLANE IN AMERICA. The COMPANY grounds ITS OWN planes. But this isn't a moratorium on just BP rigs, is it Vickie? No, it isn't.

Nice try, FAIL.

I don't have just a feeling - there is some evidence. There doesn't always have to be a mountain of evidence - although with "The most transparent administration in history" we can't expect much.

And you're right - Toonces should just continue to focus on his golf game and on squeezing the life out of coastal states. The hell with doing his job. After all, it's not like he's done any part of it since he was inaugurated. He's more concerned with being President and going to parties, while swallowing up the occasional major industry and squashing another. But we're just bashing him for no reason, right?

Now the FEDS are preventing LA from constructing berms to prevent the oil from reaching shore. Exactly what part of "he wants this disaster to continue" do you not yet understand?

Katrina: Gov. Blanco, Mayor Nagin - threw their hands up and blamed FEMA.
BP: Jindal and LA doing everything the FEDS will not do and having to fight them off while trying to do it.

 

[foxpaws]

No they don't. The FEDS don't ground EVERY PLANE IN AMERICA. The COMPANY grounds ITS OWN planes. But this isn't a moratorium on just BP rigs, is it Vickie? No, it isn't.

Nice try, FAIL.

The FAA comes in and tells the airline to 'voluntarily' ground the planes Foss - or they will do it. They have done it in the past. They allow the airline to do it first to save face.

And BP doesn't own rigs...

And if Obama didn't have a moratorium on rigs right now, and another disaster happened, how huge would the public outcry be. You find the solution to the problem now, and then allow the rigs to start back up. There is a chance this will happen again - especially drilling as deep as they are.

Also - the bunk that has gone on before about how they are pushing the oil companies to drill in deeper and deeper water because of restrictions - real bunk. Look at the oil gushing from this well, and it is from a relief pipe - not the main pipe - the amount of oil from this one well is staggering. BP is drilling at this location because of the amount of wealth it can generate from one group of wells. ROR is immense when you are looking at how many barrels a day BP expected to take out of this find. They wouldn't drill if the gain wasn't worth it.

And you're right - Toonces should just continue to focus on his golf game and on squeezing the life out of coastal states. The hell with doing his job. After all, it's not like he's done any part of it since he was inaugurated. He's more concerned with being President and going to parties, while swallowing up the occasional major industry and squashing another. But we're just bashing him for no reason, right?

and this has what to do with the fact that he knew about the problems on this rig in February - ah, nothing foss.

And I believed Bush focused on vacations at the ranch and his special barbecue sauce while in office -

Now the FEDS are preventing LA from constructing berms to prevent the oil from reaching shore. Exactly what part of "he wants this disaster to continue" do you not yet understand?

Katrina: Gov. Blanco, Mayor Nagin - threw their hands up and blamed FEMA.
BP: Jindal and LA doing everything the FEDS will not do and having to fight them off while trying to do it.

And what problems does building berms cause? Certainly some, dredging causes problems with hurricanes, creating deeper water close to shore. They cause tidal flow problems, create problems on the already naturally occuring barrier islands, etc. I really don't know the entire reasons for not building berms foss - I am not an oceanographer or a member of the Army Corps. of Engineers.

But, I am glad that you are an expert, after reading an article at Hot Air.

 

[fossten]

The FAA comes in and tells the airline to 'voluntarily' ground the planes Foss - or they will do it. They have done it in the past. They allow the airline to do it first to save face.

And BP doesn't own rigs...

And if Obama didn't have a moratorium on rigs right now, and another disaster happened, how huge would the public outcry be. You find the solution to the problem now, and then allow the rigs to start back up. There is a chance this will happen again - especially drilling as deep as they are.

Also - the bunk that has gone on before about how they are pushing the oil companies to drill in deeper and deeper water because of restrictions - real bunk. Look at the oil gushing from this well, and it is from a relief pipe - not the main pipe - the amount of oil from this one well is staggering. BP is drilling at this location because of the amount of wealth it can generate from one group of wells. ROR is immense when you are looking at how many barrels a day BP expected to take out of this find. They wouldn't drill if the gain wasn't worth it.

So, you're going to try a semantical argument? Bottom line, the FAA doesn't ban all flights. You've tried to distract from this analogy with stupid inaccurate comparisons but you still can't move me off the point. Obama tried to ban ALL DRILLING in the gulf as the result of one leak. Never mind that he doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do this - he's failed to produce a good enough reason to do so as stated by the judge who shut his stupid ass down. Suck on that.

and this has what to do with the fact that he knew about the problems on this rig in February - ah, nothing foss.

Everything he does is centered around creating as much chaos as possible so he can take advantage of the crisis, per Rahm Emanuel's quote. Sorry you're too myopic in your worship of Teh Won that you can't connect the dots.

Think about it - Captain Kickass refuses to protect our borders, then tries to prevent AZ from doing so. Captain Kickass refuses to protect our shores, then tries to prevent LA from doing so. Pattern, anyone?

And I believed Bush focused on vacations at the ranch and his special barbecue sauce while in office -

Lame, Vickie. That's your best shot? Yawn.

And what problems does building berms cause? Certainly some, dredging causes problems with hurricanes, creating deeper water close to shore. They cause tidal flow problems, create problems on the already naturally occuring barrier islands, etc. I really don't know the entire reasons for not building berms foss - I am not an oceanographer or a member of the Army Corps. of Engineers.

But, I am glad that you are an expert, after reading an article at Hot Air.

Er - it's sand. How much more damage can a berm cause than oil reaching the shore? :bowrofl: Very, very pitiful argument, Vickie.

According to you, Toonces has had SIXTY FOUR DAYS to decide what to do - and he's done nothing but impede progress and point fingers. When does he actually show some leadership? Hmm?

The bottom line is that Toonces - and you - are more interested in debating the finer points of sand dredging than in LEADING, and in SOLVING the crisis. This might be news to you, Vickster, but we have a REAL disaster on our hands that needs LEADERSHIP - this isn't one of your pot-smoking Nobel peace prize wannabe jam sessions where you can circumnavigate total space while delving into the whichness of the why.

That's the difference between a community agitator and a leader with actual experience.

But hey, you just keep distracting away from the real issue - that YOUR BOY is completely incompetent and HATES America, and just focus on where I found an article. We all know you're not the leader type either.

By the way, you still haven't answered my question - why is Cokehead fighting against our own drilling while giving billions to George Soros to drill in even deeper water?

 

[fossten]

Update: Obama has now prevented other oil skimmers from being brought from other parts of the country because "we might need them there." This per Senator LeMieux.

Cloward-Piven.

 

[foxpaws]

So, you're going to try a semantical argument? Bottom line, the FAA doesn't ban all flights. You've tried to distract from this analogy with stupid inaccurate comparisons but you still can't move me off the point. Obama tried to ban ALL DRILLING in the gulf as the result of one leak. Never mind that he doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do this - he's failed to produce a good enough reason to do so as stated by the judge who shut his stupid ass down. Suck on that.

And he hasn't banned all drilling - only off shore in the Gulf. And you didn't answer - how much blame would you place on Obama if he didn't ban the drilling and another incident happen. Heck - you are blaming him for this one... duh...

Everything he does is centered around creating as much chaos as possible so he can take advantage of the crisis, per Rahm Emanuel's quote. Sorry you're too myopic in your worship of Teh Won that you can't connect the dots.

Think about it - Captain Kickass refuses to protect our borders, then tries to prevent AZ from doing so. Captain Kickass refuses to protect our shores, then tries to prevent LA from doing so. Pattern, anyone?

So, he caused the crisis, according to you and McCullough, and now he is taking advantage of the crisis. Has this helped his ratings - his chances of being re-elected? How exactly has this helped the administration Foss? Ah, it hasn't - the results aren't justifying the means, because there isn't a 'chaos creation' center that is planning these sort of incidents Foss - that is conspiracy theory - Alex Jones has dozens of articles about the gulf - many along these same lines - are you reading them, in between your perusal of how fluoride in the water is killing us...? Drinking branch water and grain alcohol now?

So, you post an article - then when it is shown that the article is false - you start to create new arguments. I thought that is what you accused me off foss.

This article is false, McCullough has nothing to back his claims, and you now need to divert attention elsewhere.

So I attempt to answer some questions, such as why berm building may not be a great idea (once again foss - I don't know, but there are reasons for not doing it, as well as reasons for doing it, not being a civil engineer, or oceanographer, nor do I know any, I can't really answer much about berm building other than inserting some 'whynots' as food for thought) - and bring back some common sense into the conversation and you start wandering around in Soros/Brazilian conspiracy territory as well.

Fine foss - hope that bunker building is going well - you obviously believe the time is at hand.

 

[fossten]

And he hasn't banned all drilling - only off shore in the Gulf. And you didn't answer - how much blame would you place on Obama if he didn't ban the drilling and another incident happen. Heck - you are blaming him for this one... duh...

He banned all drilling offshore in the gulf. Period. How many companies does that affect? How many drilling platforms that aren't owned by BP? How many jobs (100,000) are lost? You really want to defend this authoritarian?

And I wouldn't blame him if another accident happened - just like I'm not blaming him for this accident. I'm blaming him for a) failing to lead and b) impeding the progress of stopping the disaster.

So, he caused the crisis, according to you and McCullough

Straw man. I never said that, and neither did McCullough. You're really transparent in your pathetic mischaracterizations. The rest of your post is not worth reading since you're back to your typical lying again.

Now you're devolving your debate into name calling. You stay classy, beyotch!

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

If you can't respond to my points honestly, I won't respond to yours at all.

1. Topic comes up
2. Discussion begins
3. Foxpaws hijacks the thread with a false comparison or straw men/red herrings or a bunch of nonsense
4. Conservs call her out for her dishonesty
5. Foxpaws happily plays victim and doggedly continues to defend, deflect, and change the subject
6. Everyone tires of her ad nauseum arguments and leaves the thread
7. Foxpaws claims victory

 

[fossten]

Update: Salazar used fraudulent paperwork to back reasoning behind moratorium on drilling.


From Feldman's ruling:

In the Executive Summary to the Report, (Salazar) recommends "a six-month moratorium on permits for new wells being drilled using floating rigs." He also recommends "an immediate halt to drilling operations on the 33 permitted wells, not including relief wells currently being drilled by BP, that are currently being drilled using floating rigs in the Gulf of Mexico."

Much to the government's discomfort and this Court's uneasiness, the Summary also states that "the recommendations contained in this report have been peer-reviewed by seven experts identified by the National Academy of Engineering." As the plaintiffs, and the experts themselves, pointedly observe, this statement was misleading. The experts charge it was a "misrepresentation." It was factually incorrect.

So, in other words, Salazar lied. Um...how does he not get disbarred for this?

Oh, but we're supposed to believe that Captain Kickass didn't know about this either, right?

 

[mmtphoto]

You are not going to convince some that Barry is not the messiah-walks on water, is all-knowing and omnipotent.

With all that is going on, the Emperor has lost his clothes-he is being exposed for what he has always been, a charlatan who charms and convinces the dreamers or the feeble-minded that his way is the 'change' they long for-yet, this is a person who has deliberately hidden details of his past, made grandiose promises to convince a population hungry for 'change' that he offers any promise-and who has delivered not only MORE of the same, but has introduced an element of amateurish, non-existent and purely political 'leadership' into the mix.

The only thing 'transparent' about this administration is that he had NO clue what he is doing, or what needs to be done to fix or repair the problems of this country. Health care, immigration, economy, unemployment, foreign affairs, the military, management of military confilcts, national security...take your pick, this guy is in WAY over his head.

If you have ANY other opinion, you are an enabler and have your head in the sand. It is not a Democratic or Republican thing anymore, the general population now knows or is becoming aware that Obama, with a majority Congress, is much more than dangerous -it's membership has to change, and will this Fall. That will slow the damage that barry can do for the last two years, at which time a new direction (actually, ANY direction) can proceed. Reference Jimmy Carter, 1978-history does repeat itself, and in this case, in spades (go ahead, get bent about that-all the apologists are sure to see sinister motivations for valid observations-it is your method of operation).

Obama is a total amateur, completely unqualified to run this government and has proven it time and again. It is obvious that he is over his head, and completely unqualified to be President. To think anything else is completely unwarranted and is to deny the facts.

 

[foxpaws]

And I wouldn't blame him if another accident happened - just like I'm not blaming him for this accident. I'm blaming him for a) failing to lead and b) impeding the progress of stopping the disaster.

Straw man. I never said that, and neither did McCullough. You're really transparent in your pathetic mischaracterizations. The rest of your post is not worth reading since you're back to your typical lying again.

Really - what is the first paragraph of the article you posted, and apparently agree with...

It now appears that the White House knew about problems in the Gulf two months before the Deepwater Horizon explosion on April 20. What did the administration know? Why didn't they shut down the well?​

Obviously - by this paragraph alone, McCullough is claiming White House guilt, and responsibility for the entire mess... Just this one line places guilt and responsibility...

Why didn't they shut down the well?​

Typical right response in general. Get caught in lie, change subject.

There is absolutely no evidence, nor any roads leading to the conclusion that the White House knew of the problems on Deepwater Horizon, and ignored them, or perhaps encouraged the avoidance of the problems according to the Soros/Brazil conspiracy theory.

In the article this was brought up... regarding Bush and 9/11
But on his watch no other terrorist actions took lives of Americans on our soil, largely due to his steadfast leadership and willingness to accept no excuses on the matter.

So, if no other massive oil leaks occur, because of hard action (no drilling until solutions are created for similar situations) taken by the president, then Obama will be successful in his leadership ability - correct?

I now know where to get insights to what foss posts - I head out to InfoWars.com and peruse the articles... A new one on Petraeus - no doubt what lead to Foss's newest thread...

Once again, there is no evidence to support McCullough's claims in his flawed article. Foss can't argue that, so he wanders about aimlessly looking for something else that can catch your eye - like a shiny bauble... oh, look, the berms, the berms.... oh look, the leadership is lacking, the leadership is lacking.

This thread is about McCullough's article - one that is easily proved false. If only Foss would read and THINK before he posts.

 

[fossten]

Fibster, I never go to infowars. You constantly raise that canard, but it won't hold water. You know more about that website than anybody else here. The fact that you bring that up so often is like the boy crying wolf. You know you have no credibility, so you have to invent things to say about me. Furthermore, your attempt to ridicule is falling flat as well. It's instructive that you have no other recourse other than proof by assertion, straw men, ad hominem, ad nauseum, and red herrings to make your point.

Nice try, Alinsky.

I'm sure you'll try to get the last word in this thread, as is typical of your ad nauseum strategy. You're becoming a parody of yourself, Marxist. Just keep suckling at the breast of The One. It is He who gives you sustenance.

So, Vick, you still haven't answered my question - why is Zero fighting against our own drilling while giving billions to George Soros to drill in even deeper water?