Obama out of touch

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
Either one would be misdirected anger. The anger belongs with BP.
Click to expand...

That would be "British Petroleum" in case you didn't know.
 
Steinhauer said:
That would be "British Petroleum" in case you didn't know.
Click to expand...
My, you are such a good Patriot! Anything not American is bad. Those bad oil guys in BRITAIN caused this spill, and that LIBERAL President failed to fix it. I also recall how those MEXICAN border patrol were such criminals when they drew their weapons on AMERICAN border patrol that had killed a boy and were threatening to cross the border into MEXICO.

I bolded the important stuff for you. And yes your welcome. :eek3:
 
kokonut said:
Hey, common sense says that it's best to contain any oil spills as early as possible...not wait and wait and wait and wait....

If anybody can't see that as crucial in helping reduce the impact and spread of oil then I can't help them. Waiting 50 or 60 days down the road isn't proactive...it's being irresponsible.
Click to expand...

Common sense also says that when the methods being offered as assistance have been proven failures in the past, it is wise not to use them again.
 
Steinhauer said:
That would be "British Petroleum" in case you didn't know.
Click to expand...

Of course I know. I just didn't think it was necessary to spell it out. I guess it needs to be spelled out for you to prevent your errors in progressive logic.
 
saywhatkid said:
My, you are such a good Patriot! Anything not American is bad. Those bad oil guys in BRITAIN caused this spill, and that LIBERAL President failed to fix it. I also recall how those MEXICAN border patrol were such criminals when they drew their weapons on AMERICAN border patrol that had killed a boy and were threatening to cross the border into MEXICO.

I bolded the important stuff for you. And yes your welcome. :eek3:
Click to expand...

:laugh2:
 
kokonut said:
Logical progression?

Best laugh I had all day!

Thanks for showing that Steinhauer.
Click to expand...

logical progression? the one who exposed your blatant racism with a picture of your "tar baby" PM?

yea that was the best laugh of the life. thanks for reminding me. *chuckle*
 
saywhatkid said:
My, you are such a good Patriot! Anything not American is bad. Those bad oil guys in BRITAIN caused this spill, and that LIBERAL President failed to fix it. I also recall how those MEXICAN border patrol were such criminals when they drew their weapons on AMERICAN border patrol that had killed a boy and were threatening to cross the border into MEXICO.

I bolded the important stuff for you. And yes your welcome. :eek3:
Click to expand...

And..?
 
jillio said:
And...your racism and bigotry are hanging out in public view again.:wave: Put that stuff away. We are tired of looking at it.
Click to expand...

It seems like disciplinary action may needed to teach the lesson.
 
jillio said:
The help that was offered was determined to be of questionable efficacy. It makes no sense to accept help that isn't helpful.:roll:

But, if he had of accepted help that was determined to be of no use, you would be complaining that he made a bad decision. Either way, he can do nothing right in your opinion. Same old, same old.
Click to expand...

Actually they turned down the Dutch because their tech left a remaining oil residue that was beyond our regulations.......I guess they felt oil and complying with regulations is better than oil residue.
 
TXgolfer said:
Actually they turned down the Dutch because their tech left a remaining oil residue that was beyond our regulations.......I guess they felt oil and complying with regulations is better than oil residue.
Click to expand...

well - the marshland around Louisiana is extraordinary sensitive. If Dutch's technique can effectively remove the oil but will destroy the environment in process... then there's no point..... hence EPA Regulation.

Kevin Costner's technique seems promising. BP is working with him to get it working on large-scale project but I'm also wondering why BP denied James Cameron's help.
 
TXgolfer said:
Actually they turned down the Dutch because their tech left a remaining oil residue that was beyond our regulations.......I guess they felt oil and complying with regulations is better than oil residue.
Click to expand...

Yep. Still makes it a method that is not useful for our purposes.
 
Jiro said:
well - the marshland around Louisiana is extraordinary sensitive. If Dutch's technique can effectively remove the oil but will destroy the environment in process... then there's no point..... hence EPA Regulation.

Kevin Costner's technique seems promising. BP is working with him to get it working on large-scale project but I'm also wondering why BP denied James Cameron's help.
Click to expand...

:dunno: seems like the Dutch at day 3 would have been better than nothing till day 50+ at least it would be a start. We would see a fraction of the wildlife problems we see now.....

Dutch as the answer? no....... Dutch as a temp solution until better methods are found? I would have said yes.
 
TXgolfer said:
Actually they turned down the Dutch because their tech left a remaining oil residue that was beyond our regulations.......I guess they felt oil and complying with regulations is better than oil residue.
Click to expand...

Which is mind boggling ironic. Hurray for the Jones Act!
 
TXgolfer said:
:dunno: seems like the Dutch at day 3 would have been better than nothing till day 50+ at least it would be a start. We would see a fraction of the wildlife problems we see now.....

Dutch as the answer? no....... Dutch as a temp solution until better methods are found? I would have said yes.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Common sense says the earlier the better...not later. Doing so acting quickly buys a lot of time and reduces any additional but potential ecological damage. Waiting 50+ days isn't a solution. It's a disaster. Obama owns that outright.
 
TXgolfer said:
:dunno: seems like the Dutch at day 3 would have been better than nothing till day 50+ at least it would be a start. We would see a fraction of the wildlife problems we see now.....

Dutch as the answer? no....... Dutch as a temp solution until better methods are found? I would have said yes.
Click to expand...

But it would severely compromise clean up. There would need to be an extensive clean up even after the Dutch method, and still there would be residue compromising the environment.
 
TXgolfer said:
:dunno: seems like the Dutch at day 3 would have been better than nothing till day 50+ at least it would be a start. We would see a fraction of the wildlife problems we see now.....

Dutch as the answer? no....... Dutch as a temp solution until better methods are found? I would have said yes.
Click to expand...

Day 3? why? BP informed us that they can do it with solutions they had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top