Can The Bush Administration Be Blamed For The BP Oil Spill?
 

A little bit...

(From an article from Monday, 14 July 2008)

Bush Lifts Offshore Drilling Ban

"This proposal is something you'd expect from an oil company CEO, not the president of the United States," said Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate Environment Committee.

"The president is taking special-interest government to a new level and threatening our thriving coastal economy."

Story here....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7506346.stm

Oh the memories...

Absolutely.

So why did Obama not stop it when he got into office when he controlled both the houses?

I love that the right complains endlessly about how Obama tries to tackle too many issues at once, except for when it serves their opposing interests to complain that he is not doing enough. So funny!

All you have to do is get everyone to stop using oil and the problem is solved! :thumbsup No big issue other than that!

I don't see how you can blame Bush or Obama for the spill.

I blame Obama, i am republican

I don't know. Can Clinton be blamed for 9/11?

Funniest Rick James Interview Ever!!!
 

I think Rick James is to blame!

I asked a question. I don't think either Bush or Obama are to blame. However, if oil companies were allowed to drill closer to the shore this shit may never have happened. And if it did it would 1000s of times easier to clean up. :2 cents:

and who do we blame for allowing Bush in the second run?

https://youtube.com/watch?v=77pBcf0o444

Do you have a real news source?

I'm not seeing the comparison. Bush wanted offshore drilling restrictions lifted.
Did Clinton want a bunch of New York's buildings wired with thermite and knocked down in a false flag to wage war with an inept country under the guise of 'liberation' for the sole purpose of extracting more oil out of the mid-east?

The comparison is simple. I'm just going to set aside the false flag thermite shit because it's ridiculous nonsense unsubstaniated by fact. Reasonable people not consumed with conspiracy nonsense were quick to point out that Bush had been in office for 9 months already when the attack on 9/11 took place and thus must shoulder the responsibility because it happened on his watch. What I'm questioning here is if those same people will now blame Obama because after all the oild disaster took place on his watch.

Personally I don't think either were "to blame" even if the buck ultimately stopped at their desks.

Let me ask you a question, in order to determine exactly where you stand.

If the next election was between Obama and Palin, who would you vote for?

Simple question - cut and dry - who does IllTestYourGirls vote for?

Depends on who is running on third party tickets. I have not yet been brainwashed into thinking there are only two choices.

It's still not a good comparison though. In 9/11 there were numerous systems that should have prevented it, and every single one of them failed. Most importantly, the gov's own intel. (assuming you believe it was really just a couple of grade school terrorists that pulled it off).

With BP... intel didn't fail. Norad didn't fail. The military didn't fail. The airlines security didn't fail. It may have been sheer incompetence on the part of those involved directly, like BP, Halliburton, etc... but it can't be attributed to the incompetence of the government. 9/11 can.

This is simply a hypothetical question.

You only have the 2 candidates - which do you choose?

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

:thumbsup

by that you mean... "Amp, you made a point but I shall not back down and admit that your words are substantial."

conspiracy or not. his statement is very valid...

I stay home and cry :1orglaugh

Actually, I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. I'm quite capable of saying what I mean and I most certainly don't need any help from you. In this case I mean I simply don't agree.

If the buck for 9/11 ultimately stopped with Bush because it was his watch and he was in charge then the same argument can be applied to Obama. If offshore drilling was so dangerous, if regulation so poor, and Obama failed to act to change these things then how does the blame not fall at least partially on him? Especially given the context of this particular argument where people are blaming Bush, who is no longer in office and hasn't been for more than a year.

Context is everything, a subtlety perhaps that's lost on you. I think you've missed the entire point of my post and I'm not sure I can make it any easier for you.

Oh hey... im not here to blame either candidate... I was simply commenting on both you and Amp's posts. Nothing more ;) he had valid points about intel and what not failing as opposed to the other scenario.

Shit man.... unbunch those panties.

Youve been armbarred recently havent you.... yorue still bitter...

Shake it off..

For the record, I don't actually blame Bush for BP's oil leak.

But it is an interesting take considering last night the far right wing nuts were actually blaming environmentalists for it. "If they hadn't pushed so much to move drilling to deep water, this wouldn't have happened!"

I nearly choked on my bong hit when that came across my tv.

Actually they are right. If the drilling was closer to the shore this may have never happened and if it did it would have been fixed by now.

I don't actually blame either Obama or Bush for the oil disaster. I blame a combination of corporate greed and Americans in general. The average American's gluttonous consumption of fuel coupled with the self entitled demand for the cheapeast prices in the First World, in my mind, must shoulder the majority of the blame.

And if BP / Halliburton would have put in the proper safety gear, none of this would be a discussion today.

Blame whoever will make you feel better I guess
If you love the very earth that Obama walks on, Blame Bush
But if you're a realist, Blame BP for not using the better valve that's available and the government for not making them.

Well, you didn't really answer the question, but I still respect your non-decision a bit more than if you had selected a certifiable moron over Obama, just to be anti-Obama, no matter what.

I can agree with that, but I still want to know exactly what was discussed and agreed to during Cheney's secret closed door energy meetings.

:thumbsup

Good question. But same thing can be said about the Health Care bill, big pharm and big insurance. Bush/Cheney = corporatist Obama/Biden = corporatist Obama/Biden = Bush/Cheney :2 cents:

Sure...
Bush is to blame for everyhing that goes wrong on Obamas watch. I'm surprised the democrats havn't blamed Al &Tippers split on Bush!

That's entirely possible.

The stress, anguish and depression that could have resulted from having the presidential election stolen from him may very well have been just too much for the marriage to endure.

Maybe you are right to some extent, but I don't remember Bush/Cheney fighting any Big Corps for the good of the lower and middle classes. They fought hard to help the super wealthy though.

The health insurance companies spent over $400 Million to fight Obama on healthcare reform for example, which Obama got passed with the hope of helping the less fortunate.

Did Big Oil spend ANY money fighting against the Bush/Cheney energy policies?

There are some parallels no matter who is in charge - mostly the fact that the big powers that be are bigger than any president, but some leaders lean more towards the rich and the Big Corps, and some lean more towards making changes to help the regular guys.

It's a blanket statement riddled with tons of specifics that either party can cherry pick to make their point, but overall Republicans are much more aligned with Big Corps and the super wealthy than the Dems.

Both sides are corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely, there are no saints in Washington, the two party system is inherently flawed, both sides are owned by special interests, we need term limits, and on and on, but it is what it is...

Gore never wanted to be president.

The minute he chose Lieberman as his running mate his fate was sealed.

He sure spent a ton of money on something he didn't want then.

He distanced himself from Clinton, he took money from Big Oil, he chose a total asshole as a running mate, and on it goes.

I hate Bush and Cheney, but Gore did everything he could do to lose.

Sadly, I completely agree. On the bright side, it's for the best. If he wouldn't even fight for the presidency, what kind of a lousy president would he have made. Plus, it keeps things simpler. Bush alone eats those 8 years for the purpose of history.

On what basis do you make that statement. There was blowout in '79...in 200 feet of water and it was not stopped for nine months...using the same identical procedures that are being used today. It was not stopped until the relief wells were drilled which took nine months. BTW...it was pumping 30,000 barrels per day into the Gulf. The only thing different today...hopefully...drilling technology may have improved to the point that it will not take nine months to drill relief wells.

Gotta love BFT3K. We can't blame Obama for anything, but we can blame Bush instead! :) :) :)

riiiiiigggghhhttt... "Drill, Baby, Drill!"

I'm pissed off about many of Obama's actions and non-actions to date, but so far his fuck-ups are not nearly as large, and his agenda is not as pro-Big Corp and anti-middle class, as the previous administration.

Really? You think so?




Amazing that BP's using every method that failed in 1979.

fuck that propaganda, you commie.

The Bush Administration caused AIDS, Cancer, and anal warts. Just ask anyone on GFY.

Have a reliable source?

Yes, its called Google searching the term "1979 Gulf Oil Spill"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ixtoc_I_oil_spill

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/e...er-spill_N.htm


In '79 it was 200 ft deep. In 2010 its 5,000 ft deep. All the same failed methods of stopping the leak. Closer, shallower, it doesn't matter, the problem still happenned, twice.