• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Obama be directly in charge of the oil spill response

Who should be directly in charge?

  • Total voters
    17
Slartibartfast

Slartibartfast

Jesus loves you.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
66,794
Reaction score
50,679
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
In your opinion, do you think that Obama should be directly in charge of the oil spill response or should some other organization have that role?

The reason I ask is I keep seeing people saying that Obama is not doing enough, but I don't believe he should be directly in charge. I am curious about other people's views on the matter.
 
Last edited:
I would agree with you, I dont know if he actually has any experience with organizing oil spill cleanup. :p
 
No. Obama shouldn't even be in charge of the country. Talk about incompetence.
 
bicycleman said:
No. Obama shouldn't even be in charge of the country. Talk about incompetence.
Click to expand...

I agree, we haven't had a great president since Clinton. But that has no bearing on the question. Lets assume for a second we had a great president, Who or what do you think should be in charge of the response.
 
HE SHOULD BE!!! surely they can send him down in a midget sub to oversee the spill personally
 
megaprogman said:
I agree, we haven't had a great president since Clinton. But that has no bearing on the question. Lets assume for a second we had a great president, Who or what do you think should be in charge of the response.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with you about Clinton, but I think Clinton would have taken charge and been able to accomplish a whole lot more than Obama is pretending to do by going around and picking up tar balls in the sand.
 
The President assumed responsibility for the incident, by his own wishes he is in charge. Should or shouldn't doesn't matter.
 
This is a little off the subject, but I figured I'd get more of a response if I post it here. I need some help.

Have a friend who needs help can anyone come up with a way to help him.



Does anyone know how to cancel a bid on eBay? I put in a bid for a "Mickey Mouse Outfit" ...

and now it seems I'm only six minutes away from owning Obama and his entire Cabinet.
 
bicycleman said:
This is a little off the subject, but I figured I'd get more of a response if I post it here. I need some help.

Have a friend who needs help can anyone come up with a way to help him.



Does anyone know how to cancel a bid on eBay? I put in a bid for a "Mickey Mouse Outfit" ...

and now it seems I'm only six minutes away from owning Obama and his entire Cabinet.
Click to expand...

THATS RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :roll:
 
Can I go other? A coalition of a Federal Agency, State opperatives from those affected, and BP. Likely the agency as the people directly in charge since at this point this is an economic and practical threat to the nation and needs to be acted upon, but it would need all three groups of actors in getting it done I believe.

While Obama should not be directly in charge I do think he should be ACTIVELY involved in making sure things are moving forward, that it is the top priority of at the very least his agency and BP, and being the person whose the representitive to the nation as to what the agency under his administration is doing.

I also think he has a far bigger affect on it in regards to creating the antagonistic atmosphere regarding this. I don't give a **** about whose ass he wants to kick. I don't give a **** that he wants this to look like his 9/11 instead of his Katrina. I don't give a **** that they want BP to pay. I don't give a **** that Halliburton may be involved. I don't give a **** if this is helping their political hopes in other ways. I don't give a **** if BP is at fault. I don't give a **** if they think BP should have done something sooner or be more involved. I don't give a **** about really anything at this point other than stopping the spill and then cleaning up the oil that is threatening multiple states of the United States of America.

Once the former has happened and the latter is occuring THEN if the Federal Government wants to look into possible legal action, fines, reperations, regulations, etc then be my guest. However all this crap coming from them before hand is no less infuriating and no more appropriate than BP's incessant PR spending on TV ad's and google links.

Stop acting like children, from both BP and Obama's administration, trying to continually pass the buck, point the finger, and focus on things that you think will help YOU and start dealing with the actual problem that will help your customers and your consitutents.
 
Directly in charge? No. As leader of this country, involved in seeing that things like the 1994 plan is in place and waiving the jones act so the skimmers the dutch offered on day three be allowed in to help?


abso freaking loot ley.....
 
megaprogman said:
In your opinion, do you think that Obama should be directly in charge of the oil spill response or should some other organization have that role?

The reason I ask is I keep seeing people saying that Obama is not doing enough, but I don't believe he should be directly in charge. I am curious about other people's views on the matter.
Click to expand...

I very much agree with you on that. It's utterly ridiculous to pretend that a sittting POTUS should be micromanaging in areas clearly outside his experience and expertise. Anyone running their pieholes about wanting him to "plug the leak," is quite clearly nothing more than partisan hack who's ONLY real interest is in trying to make Obama look bad. Why these types actually think that rational people don't see through their idiotic propaganda, is beyond me.
 
The Uncola said:
I very much agree with you on that. It's utterly ridiculous to pretend that a sittting POTUS should be micromanaging in areas clearly outside his experience and expertise. Anyone running their pieholes about wanting him to "plug the leak," is quite clearly nothing more than partisan hack who's ONLY real interest is in trying to make Obama look bad. Why these types actually think that rational people don't see through their idiotic propaganda, is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Why would Obama need any help looking bad. He's doing a fine job already in that category.
 
The Uncola said:
I very much agree with you on that. It's utterly ridiculous to pretend that a sittting POTUS should be micromanaging in areas clearly outside his experience and expertise. Anyone running their pieholes about wanting him to "plug the leak," is quite clearly nothing more than partisan hack who's ONLY real interest is in trying to make Obama look bad. Why these types actually think that rational people don't see through their idiotic propaganda, is beyond me.
Click to expand...




So when do you think Obama should waive the jones act and allow the dutch skimmers in?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So when do you think Obama should waive the jones act and allow the dutch skimmers in?
Click to expand...

I think he should, give lets keep things in perspective here. Given the enormity of the problem, three boats are not going to do much.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
3 boats?


Steffy: U.S. and BP slow to accept Dutch expertise | Business: Loren Steffy | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought it was three boats. Ok 4 sets of equipment. However, given it was three days after the disaster and the initial estimations of the size of the leak, I can see why that mistake was made. Overall, I agree with the article that this shows a profound lack of coordination, but now that I have seen 9/11 and Katrina, that is par for the course these days on disasters of this magnitude. Its an unfortunate mistake, but an understandable one I think.
 
megaprogman said:
Sorry, I thought it was three boats. Ok 4 sets of equipment. However, given it was three days after the disaster and the initial estimations of the size of the leak, I can see why that mistake was made. Overall, I agree with the article that this shows a profound lack of coordination, but now that I have seen 9/11 and Katrina, that is par for the course these days on disasters of this magnitude. Its an unfortunate mistake, but an understandable one I think.
Click to expand...



It's more than 4 boats as well. We have been offered help from many different countries. However, the jones act is still in place. There is no reason for this, to me its almost criminal.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
It's more than 4 boats as well. We have been offered help from many different countries. However, the jones act is still in place. There is no reason for this, to me its almost criminal.
Click to expand...

From the article, it says there are four fittings for four boats.

.S. ships are being outfitted this week with four pairs of the skimming booms airlifted from the Netherlands and should be deployed within days. Each pair can process 5 million gallons of water a day, removing 20,000 tons of oil and sludge.
Click to expand...

However, according to this article, it seems that this Jones Act is not getting in the way

http://www.eurasiareview.com/201006...d-jones-act-waiver-in-oil-spill-response.html

Currently, 15 foreign-flagged vessels are involved in the largest response to an oil spill in U.S. history. No Jones Act waivers have been granted because none of these vessels have required such a waiver to conduct their operations in the Gulf of Mexico.
Click to expand...

My guess is that this is a case of the right hand and left hand not knowing what they are doing. Which brings me back to my point that large scale disasters always reveal inefficiencies and unforeseen problems in the response systems.
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
From the article, it says there are four fittings for four boats.
Click to expand...




What I am getting at is that there are more people than the dutch willing to help.



According to Foreign Policy, thirteen entities that had offered the U.S. oil spill assistance within about two weeks of the Horizon rig explosion. They were the governments of Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United Nations.

Read more: Here's The Real Reason America Refused International Help On The Oil Spill
Click to expand...


that's 13 entities. :shock:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
What I am getting at is that there are more people than the dutch willing to help.
that's 13 entities. :shock:
Click to expand...

From that article:
On the other hand, waivers of the Jones may be granted by the Administration in cases of national emergencies or in cases of strategic interest. It would appear the U.S. government's initial refusal to foreign help most likely stemmed from a mis-calculation of the scale and deepwater technological barriers for this unprecedented disaster, and/or perhaps ..... pride.
Click to expand...

Again, miscommunication and general screwedupness, which is normal for a new problem, whether it is in government, business, whatever. Especially considering that some foreign ships are working in the gulf despite a waiver.
 
megaprogman said:
From that article:


Again, miscommunication and general screwedupness, which is normal for a new problem, whether it is in government, business, whatever. Especially considering that some foreign ships are working in the gulf despite a waiver.
Click to expand...




I don't need a degree from havard or bee a rocket surgeon to know it is idiotic to turn down help like this. Come on now...
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I don't need a degree from havard or bee a rocket surgeon to know it is idiotic to turn down help like this. Come on now...
Click to expand...

The initial assessment, was that 5k barrels per day were spewing. That assessment still stood at the time of the offer for help. It was determined that help was not necessary at the time. Later on, the estimates on the leak were changed and it was determined that help was needed. Now boats are coming in from other countries. Seems simple to me.

The only problem here is that the government was too slow to respond, but that always happens in a new problem. I hate it, but it will always happen as it always has happened, at least as far as I can tell.
 
megaprogman said:
From that article:


Again, miscommunication and general screwedupness, which is normal for a new problem, whether it is in government, business, whatever. Especially considering that some foreign ships are working in the gulf despite a waiver.
Click to expand...
In other words; incompetence.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom