....for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch
workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity
for court cases...

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

No more than the $75 million cap, the taxpayers would pick up the rest,
and we'd be overpaying Halliburton et al for ****ing up the cleanup.

But...froggy and his daughter might get work out of it...

wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If
Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the
oil business working together to plug this well on the first day.
I suspect Obama is still not getting that level of cooperation from
people he has demonized for 2 years.


You're both wingers, and full of it.

1. This type blowout has never happened before, and nobody can plug it,
then or now.

2. BP already has had from the beginning the best expertise in the oil
industry to try to plug it. It's in their interest to do so, because
the longer oil flows, the better their chance of going bankrupt.
Obama doesn't need BP's "cooperation." He just has to make them pay for
the damages and try to keep his poll numbers up.

3. Only the feds have the clout and resources to clean up the mess.
And whether Bush or Obama, it's the same creaky bureaucracy unless POTUS
commands the military to take over and control activities with the rules
thrown out.
The scope of this disaster demanded that from the beginning.
Bush failed the test for Katrina. Obama has failed now.

4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures.
One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double
failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed.
Drilling then proceeds through the caisson.
Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal.

5. You guys playing politics with a national tragedy are dopes.

Jim - Injecting some common sense here.

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

...for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch
workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity
for court cases...

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

the taxpayers would be bailing out BP since t hey're rich and need the
help...

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If
Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the
oil business working together to plug this wel

since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug
it?

On 16/06/2010 1:12 PM, Harry wrote:
...for cleanup and damages, pluse $100 million immediately for oil patch
workers out of work, plus no limits on future payments, plus no immunity
for court cases...

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

No more than the $75 million cap, the taxpayers would pick up the rest,
and we'd be overpaying Halliburton et al for ****ing up the cleanup.

But...froggy and his daughter might get work out of it...

I think it is much more simple.

BP foreign.
Exxon American
GM American
Toyota Foreign

Obamer is just doing the old bully trick.

Bet the CEO for BP gets fired shortly. I am not a shareholder, but if I
was, I would torch the CEO... He should have, behind closed doors told
Obama o shove it. Forced marist Obama's hand.

Worst that happens, is BP (USA) goes down the toilet, BP World lives on
and they have nothing to do with marxist USA.

--
Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If
Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the
oil business working together to plug this well on the first day.
I suspect Obama is still not getting that level of cooperation from
people he has demonized for 2 years.


Come on! Obama had people onsite the next day. The "best people" are,
according to all reports, BP techs. They have the most experience.

If B/C were in charge, Bush would be flying around the country afraid to
land, and Cheney would be holed up in his undisclosed location clinking
glasses with his oil buddy execs.

Obama hasn't demonized anyone, at least not anyone who didn't deserve it.
Please cite your claim otherwise.

"Jim" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If
Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the
oil business working together to plug this well on the first day.
I suspect Obama is still not getting that level of cooperation from
people he has demonized for 2 years.


You're both wingers, and full of it.

1. This type blowout has never happened before, and nobody can plug it,
then or now.

The relief wells will supposedly do that.


2. BP already has had from the beginning the best expertise in the oil
industry to try to plug it. It's in their interest to do so, because
the longer oil flows, the better their chance of going bankrupt.
Obama doesn't need BP's "cooperation." He just has to make them pay for
the damages and try to keep his poll numbers up.

Umm... he's a politician. He wants to get reelected. That's pretty normal.

3. Only the feds have the clout and resources to clean up the mess.
And whether Bush or Obama, it's the same creaky bureaucracy unless POTUS
commands the military to take over and control activities with the rules
thrown out.
The scope of this disaster demanded that from the beginning.
Bush failed the test for Katrina. Obama has failed now.

The only thing Obama has failed at is when he believed what BP told him and
the rest of us. They lied and continue to lie. Equating Bush's complete and
utter failure for Katrina, with being mislead is ridiculous.

4. Deep offshore drilling can be made safe with correct procedures.
One way is to require an initial 100' cemented caisson with double
failsafe shutoffs instead of a single blowout preventer on the seabed.
Drilling then proceeds through the caisson.
Oh, that adds $20-40 million to the well cost? Big deal.

That and the requirement of two relief wells done at the same time. That
would add to the costs, but it would still be quite profitable. Certainly,
the financial hit would have been less than now.

5. You guys playing politics with a national tragedy are dopes.

I agree that this is beyond politics... completely.

Jim - Injecting some common sense here.

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:29:52 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:22:20 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:12:15 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:12:23 -0400, Harry
wrote:

And if Bush and Cheney, the oil guys, were still in charge?

I am not interested in too much finger pointing but I will say, If
Bush/Cheney were in charge they would have had the best people in the
oil business working together to plug this wel

since they CAUSED the leak what makes you think they'd want to plug
it?

Because they are losing money.

cheney let them save $500K! big bux to an oil company! cheney gutted
the regulations. big bux to an oil company


You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in
building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an
outsider.

anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is
an engineering problem.

you righties keep bleating that obama should take his petroleum
engineering degree to the gulf to help out BP since it has no
experience in drilling.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:02:17 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:42:12 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in
building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an
outsider.

anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is
an engineering problem.


Exactly ... and the more engineers you have working on the fix the
better chance you have.

actually it's just the opposite. the more people you have working on
an engineering problem the more likely you are to argue yourself into
indecision.

you need the RIGHT people, not MORE people. that's what you don't
understand



The only person who says BP has all the talent in the oil industry is
Tony Harward.
Rex Tillerson from Exxon points out this wouldn't have blown out in
the first place if it was properly designed. We are letting that same
team try to fix it.

and that is exactly right. do you think BP is unique? what company
DOESN"T use BOP?

the problem was in the bush/cheney abandonment of regulation of the
oil industry to the industry itself.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:24:18 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:11:31 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:02:17 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:42:12 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

You may not like it but someone in the business has a better chance in
building a coalition of all the oil companies to fix this than an
outsider.

anybody know what this means? what 'coalition' is necessary? this is
an engineering problem.


Exactly ... and the more engineers you have working on the fix the
better chance you have.

actually it's just the opposite. the more people you have working on
an engineering problem the more likely you are to argue yourself into
indecision.

you need the RIGHT people, not MORE people. that's what you don't
understand


Again, who besides Tony Hayward says BP has the right people?

fine. you go find more experienced engineers. then let BP know about
'em.