TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on May 26, 2010 13:18:47 GMT -5
Not only socialism, but it'd be spending federal government money.
Let's be honest, Obama is washing his hands of the spill and doesn't want to get involved so it's 100% on BP. Which seems like in theory what conservatives would want.
I don't agree he's getting a pass on it though - Carville is absolutely killing him.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 26, 2010 15:06:44 GMT -5
I don't agree he's getting a pass on it though - Carville is absolutely killing him. Killing him how exactly? As long as Obama continues to think the right opinions on oil development, regulation of the oil industry, liability of the oil industry, and environmental protection, he's a lock for the pro-environment vote in 2012, regardless of how many birds/fish die in the Gulf. It benefits him to let the problem fester as long as possible because everyone knows it's 100% BP's fault. Likewise, if you want to offer a parlay, I'd bet that DADT will still be in place in 2012 too. It's an issue that's just too good to let disappear.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on May 26, 2010 16:44:10 GMT -5
I don't think Obama is deliberately letting it fester. If he could be the white knight who swoops in and plugs the leak after BP has failed to do so, it would be a huge coup for him. The simple fact is that nobody in the government knows how to stop it, just like nobody at BP knows how to stop it.
Let's be totally honest, if the government had run this from the start, we'd still have oil gushing from the seabed right now. The only difference would be that the Republicans who are hammering Obama for not doing enough right now would be hammering him for too much government interference and for not letting the "experts" (BP) solve the problem with their free market pixie dust.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on May 26, 2010 17:38:23 GMT -5
As long as Obama continues to think the right opinions on oil development, regulation of the oil industry, liability of the oil industry, and environmental protection, he's a lock for the pro-environment vote in 2012, regardless of how many birds/fish die in the Gulf. It benefits him to let the problem fester as long as possible because everyone knows it's 100% BP's fault. In order to save the environment.....Barack Obama has to destroy it...Too dumb even for a summer movie voiceover.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 26, 2010 18:12:33 GMT -5
I don't think Obama is deliberately letting it fester. If he could be the white knight who swoops in and plugs the leak after BP has failed to do so, it would be a huge coup for him. Ummm, I was led to believe he could do exactly that. neoavatara.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/obama-superman-transform-alex-ross.jpgSeveral people have made the point that "Oh my gosh! If the government steps in to help with this emergency, that's socialism and Republicans would hate that!!!!" I really hope my sarcasm meter is just broken for the day, because if that's really what you think, you are just so far gone it's not even worth discussing. I'll just assume it's the former.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on May 26, 2010 18:48:03 GMT -5
If libs would allow drilling on dry land, spills could be controlled.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on May 26, 2010 19:26:06 GMT -5
I don't agree he's getting a pass on it though - Carville is absolutely killing him. Killing him how exactly? Softly. 1 1 With his song.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,295
|
Post by SSHoya on May 26, 2010 21:43:27 GMT -5
Hey, stop giving the Prez so much flack!
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on May 26, 2010 22:58:29 GMT -5
I don't think Obama is deliberately letting it fester. If he could be the white knight who swoops in and plugs the leak after BP has failed to do so, it would be a huge coup for him. Ummm, I was led to believe he could do exactly that. neoavatara.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/obama-superman-transform-alex-ross.jpgSeveral people have made the point that "Oh my gosh! If the government steps in to help with this emergency, that's socialism and Republicans would hate that!!!!" I really hope my sarcasm meter is just broken for the day, because if that's really what you think, you are just so far gone it's not even worth discussing. I'll just assume it's the former. When you put it that way, yes it's sarcastic. But read the rest of my last post. You know as well as I do that if Obama had pushed BP aside right at the start and tried to handle it himself, he'd be getting a TON of flak from the GOP over it. They'd be screaming from the tops of their lungs at how Obama's "big government" approach was only making things worse, and how he should just back out and let the private industry experts (BP) take over, because they know how to fix things. Don't get me wrong - I've got no problem with people saying that Obama has handled this badly. I personally think that more government intervention would have been better, although I (like most Americans) can't point to one specific thing that the government could have done to make things better. I've also got no problem with people saying that the private sector should be left to regulate itself and fix its own problems. I don't agree with you, but it's a legit argument. But for crying out loud, don't say both at the same time! You can't complain about excessive government intervention with the private sector, then turn around and complain that the government isn't doing enough when the private sector fails to deal with its own problems. Either accept that government intervention in the private sector is a necessary thing, or keep your mouth shut when the private sector proves incapable of managing its own affairs.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on May 27, 2010 5:50:24 GMT -5
Since I started this thread, let me point out that with many people, Obama is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't on this issue. That said, I remain amazed at the virtual free pass he is getting on his "apparent" disengagement on this problem. I'm not sure there is a darned thing the feds could do on this problem, but his virtual disappearance on this one would bring howls from the mainstream media were they not so enthralled with him.
Finally, what troubles me is that at a time when the federal government has its hands in everything from my e-mail to building cars, why the opt out on this disaster? We are bailing out banks, propping up GM, compelling the purchase of health insurance but we can't get involved in this one?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 27, 2010 8:16:37 GMT -5
I was going to respond to Stig last night, but I think Elvado made the point more succinctly (which will not stop me in any case, as you know ). The problem with your post, Stig, if I may be so bold, is that we are talking about disaster relief right now. I dare you to find the Republican (not named Rand Paul) who is going to criticize the government for disaster relief efforts or expenditures. We are not talking about long-term takeovers of the oil industry. If Obama stepped in and tried something like that, yes, Republicans would be up in arms. I daresay a lot of Democrats would too, especially if he chose this moment in time for such a step. Yes, BP is the one who has to stop the origin of the crisis. I understand that and don't expect Obama to swoop down and plug the hole with molten lava he personally carries over from Sumatra (my snarky little jpeg aside). The feds have to let BP do its job, for better or for worse. Recriminations can come for years after. But while BP is doing that, there is quite a bit, according to Bobby Jindal and James Carville, that the federal government could be doing that would not have people screaming "Government Overreach!!!!" Obama is being (rightly, IMO) criticized today for not doing those things. He is also being criticized for the symbolic things, going about business as usual with fundraisers, golf and vacations during the crisis. I don't think anyone is really trying to have it both ways at this point. You can hypothesize that they would cry foul, but then that begs the second question: when has Barack Obama let Republican objections about too much spending or government control stop him from trying to do those things anyway? This seems an odd place to start.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on May 27, 2010 8:32:02 GMT -5
Again, what is this free pass? All I see is people complaining about "the government isn't doing enough". I don't know how it's being covered in Elvado's FoxNews/DrudgeReport bubble, but I've seen him criticized on CNN, MSNBC, blogs, the NYT (Friedman, Dowd, etc), Twitter - Colbert and The Daily Show are on reruns right now but I'm sure they'd be hammering him too. Yesterday an NPR reporter went after Lisa Jackson strikingly hard over the decision to lessen the use of Corexant.
Let's be honest, Elvado's whole shpiel is "Why is Obama getting a free pass on X/Y/Z?" I'd say it's 50% of his posts.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 27, 2010 8:42:07 GMT -5
I'll agree that Obama is no longer getting a free pass. I think he was up until this past Sunday or so (we can disagree on that, I'm sure, but it's a minor disagreement, I think). Now the criticisms are coming pretty heavily from most corners, not just Fox and, say, Erick Ericson.
And it sure didn't help his cause to have Robert Gibbs bring reporters back into the West Wing at the end of last week to admonish them for asking too many questions about BP and the Gulf.
It'll be an interesting press conference today, I think.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 27, 2010 8:49:32 GMT -5
Again, what is this free pass? All I see is people complaining about "the government isn't doing enough". I don't know how it's being covered in Elvado's FoxNews/DrudgeReport bubble, but I've seen him criticized on CNN, MSNBC, blogs, the NYT (Friedman, Dowd, etc), Twitter - Colbert and The Daily Show are on reruns right now but I'm sure they'd be hammering him too. Yesterday an NPR reporter went after Lisa Jackson strikingly hard over the decision to lessen the use of Corexant. I hate having to contribute page-views to that foul creature, but this is how the latest column from Miss Dowd absolutely KILLED the President: "With poignant scenes of oil-soaked birds and out-of-work fishermen on TV, the White House is still scrambling to get on top of this latest catastrophe. The laconic president is once more giving too much deference and trust to rapacious corporate scoundrels and failing to swiftly grasp and articulate the alarm of Americans. "One West Wing official admits that, even with all the crises they were juggling, they should have acted more urgently to re-examine the dark legacy of Cheney in the Energy and Interior Departments." That's right! Why isn't our laconic potus giving a speech, a fiery speech to articulate alarm and urgently blame everything that's happened on CHENEY? Remember, any tepid non-praise of Obama is considered "bordering on sedition" so you can understand how a nonpartisan observer would consider this kind of hostility to be a savage criticism by the press.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on May 27, 2010 9:04:58 GMT -5
Now I see that Dowd column the other way around: In her world, comparing somebody to Dick Cheney is one of the worst possible things she can say about somebody. Boz - I don't think that GOP objections about government overreach are preventing Obama from getting involved. Those criticisms would be there in force if the government was taking the lead on this instead of BP, but they're not the reason the government isn't taking the lead. The government isn't taking the lead because they're just as clueless as BP. On the brighter side, the Coast Guard says that BP's latest attempt to stop the flow of oil has been successful: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10174861.stm
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on May 27, 2010 9:05:49 GMT -5
Remember, any tepid non-praise of Obama is considered "bordering on sedition" so you can understand how a nonpartisan observer would consider this kind of hostility to be a savage criticism by the press. Ah, the "if you don't call him a Nazi, it's not criticism" school of thought.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 27, 2010 9:22:06 GMT -5
The government isn't taking the lead because THEY CAN ADMIT they're just as clueless as BP. Tweaked that for you. Being clueless didn't stop them from bank bailouts, the stimulus, or HCR.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,908
|
Post by Filo on May 27, 2010 11:14:48 GMT -5
I just don't see why Obama's supporters have such a hard time admitting that he gets kid gloves treatment from most of the media. It's not even an indictment of our brilliant leader; it's a criticism of the media.
I guess there's sort of the conundrum here, though -- Obama is not in the pocket of BIG OIL, so there have to be good reasons why he hasn't done more, but it can't be due to incompetence in his administration (so, e.g., the answer is "no one knows what to do"); whereas, if this was Bush / Cheney, it would all be either nefarious inaction based on the relationships with BIG OIL or "Bush is just ineffective and incompetent."
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on May 27, 2010 14:13:49 GMT -5
Thursday morning: looks like the "top kill" may have worked. Thursday afternoon: Obama now says "I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure that everything is done to shut this down."
Nice timing.
In other news, Obama claims he's responsible to fellow Chicagoan Lee winning last night.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,743
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on May 27, 2010 14:23:44 GMT -5
Obama may be getting kid gloves here, but it's more or less the right thing. As someone often has working with a variety of scientists and engineers, it's not like he could just "fix it." BP are the best people to solve it, and they are working on it. You can do a lot of talk, and maybe there's more to do, but I'm not sure what.
Would I criticize Bush/Cheney for this? No. But where I do criticize everyone -- Bush, Obama, Congress, every head of the EPA, etc., is that while accidents happen, there seems to be a lot of evidence that things like this could be rendered less likely with more failsafes. Those could come through regulation, and weren't.
It usually takes a disaster like this for them to be effected, so it isn't a shock. But it's still a miss.
|
|