Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now it looks pretty bad for oil executives to blame each other, but from looking at the transcripts what was actually happening was each company was only accepting part of the responsibility rather than accepting all of it. This is not in the least bit unfair, as noone wants or should be left to carry the whole can, you tend to regret any idle words when the lawyers come round to feed.

Yet despite This Obama launched an attack on the industries for finger pointing, and them proceded to point the finger himself, at BP and BP alone. I just watched his little speech on CBS online and didnt like what he said. He was chest beating about what he did from 'day one' as if he did it and then was going to armtwist BP to pay for it. In fact its the other way around, most journalists on both sides have reported the ensuing costs by BP on this issue. As Sentators are asking for even the unemployment benefit to be billed to the company, and even for the government to be compensated for lost taxes I am beginning to smell not only rough justice put what could potentially amount to an attack.

As it currently stands the oil companies are liable for a maximum of $75M economic and $500M environmental damages, BP have already waived that. Yet Obama wants a new law, passed retroactively (which is a miscarriage of justice in itself) to force a much higher cap or even elminiate the cap altogether. BP has made offers to pay for the cleanup and 'all reasonable claims' and various departments including Homeland Security have been asking for legal clarification (remember the bit about the lawyers) as to exactly what that means.

This is the US we are talking about, when claims of compensation go way beyond any actual value of damage. Going past the statutory limitations of liability is a good gesture and a good start, but to make promises that lawyers can hold onto bill for and sue for is nothing short of economic suicide. No attempts are made to put the can in the hands of the other companies involved, BP no matter its size can afford unlimited compensation for welfare for three states, let alone what the Sentaros want which appears to be a complete rerfund the local economies GDP. Yes pay for containment, yes pay the bill for the clean up, but as half the profits from the oil rigs go to the US government anyway shouldn't they pay for state losses?

Some se a compensation promise for workers in the 'Gulf states', I see a thinly disguised targeted opportunistic hostile takeover.

It's an unfortunate accident that now gives the tree huggers even more reason to spew their anti-drilling rhetoric. Obama is only helping the hippies target their rage.

Actually, he's helping them put down the bong, and vote.

Orlanth wrote:
Some se a compensation promise for workers in the 'Gulf states', I see a thinly disguised targeted opportunistic hostile takeover.

I see political rhetoric. There have been no laws passed, or movements made.

For liberals.

I'd rather they keep hugging trees, or chain themselves to them thinking it'll stop a bulldozer.

Though burying spikes in the trees should be attempted murder if caught. I had a relative die that way. Chainsaw hit a buried rail spike, kicked up and cut his chest open like a watermelon. Unfortunately it was never figured out who was responsible. No witnesses, no confessions.

Fateweaver wrote:For liberals.

I'd rather they keep hugging trees, or chain themselves to them thinking it'll stop a bulldozer.

What you want them to do is not relevant to what Obama wants them to do.

Well, chaining themselves to trees only ruins their lives.

Voting for liberal Presidents ruins MY life.

I might be selfish but I'd rather they ruin their own lives.

I'm not totally serious dogma. Not totally.

dogma wrote:

Orlanth wrote:
Some se a compensation promise for workers in the 'Gulf states', I see a thinly disguised targeted opportunistic hostile takeover.

I see political rhetoric. There have been no laws passed, or movements made.

Obama is proposing this as a new bill. Fair enough $75M is very small amount for an oil limitation. However he is proposing it be enacted retroactively, which is against any concept of justice. New laws should only effect people who fall foul of them after they are made into law, not before.

Also why involved Homeland Security, BP is hardly a terrorist threat.

I see very heavy handed arm twisting, and BP being forced to swallow grossly inflated claims and civic budgetary costs, let alone huge percentages on top in lawyers fees. No company not even one of the 'seven sisters' can match the GDP of a local region of a western country. It's a whole new economic scale.

Orlanth wrote:
Obama is proposing this as a new bill.

He can't propose it as a new bill. He can make a rhetorical statement which might lead to talk of a bill, but he himself cannot propose a bill.

Orlanth wrote:
Fair enough $75M is very small amount for an oil limitation. However he is proposing it be enacted retroactively, which is against any concept of justice. New laws should only effect people who fall foul of them after they are made into law, not before.

Yep, but proposition by the President does not equate to written law.

Orlanth wrote:
Also why involved Homeland Security, BP is hardly a terrorist threat.

FEMA is a part of Homeland Security.

Orlanth wrote:
I see very heavy handed arm twisting, and BP being forced to swallow grossly inflated claims and civic budgetary costs, let alone huge percentages on top in lawyers fees. No company not even one of the 'seven sisters' can match the GDP of a local region of a western country. It's a whole new economic scale.

But they haven't been forced to do anything. Saying something should be done is not the same thing as doing something. Politicians are masters of speaking to that which is not what they intend.

Fateweaver wrote:For liberals.

I'd rather they keep hugging trees, or chain themselves to them thinking it'll stop a bulldozer.

Though burying spikes in the trees should be attempted murder if caught. I had a relative die that way. Chainsaw hit a buried rail spike, kicked up and cut his chest open like a watermelon. Unfortunately it was never figured out who was responsible. No witnesses, no confessions.

Id rather they chained themselves to a coral reef.

But its unlikely Oblahblah can get this passed- especially the retroactive part. Hes really good at talking about fixing problems, but so far hasn't backed any of that up. With elections coming up he's trying to put up a good show that the Dems are worth re-electing. But if they dont, and he loses the support of house & senate- its really unlikely anything this ridiculous would pass. Which means he'll crack jokes about it when someone else tries to do something practical. Im sure Mr Obama is gonna totally fail to mention that Atlantis rig was given a federal safety award last year too.

Sadly- all the money they are wasting pointing fingers and shuffling blame- will likely exceed the cost of what they're allotting to clean up the oil. It would be nice if they would shut up, look at what needs to be done now-and then take steps to make sure it doesnt happen again-or at least have contingencies in place for accidents like this so it doesnt take weeks before they figure out how to plug the leak.

Mistress of minis wrote:
Sadly- all the money they are wasting pointing fingers and shuffling blame- will likely exceed the cost of what they're allotting to clean up the oil.

I really, really doubt that.

Mistress of minis wrote:
It would be nice if they would shut up, look at what needs to be done now-and then take steps to make sure it doesnt happen again-or at least have contingencies in place for accidents like this so it doesnt take weeks before they figure out how to plug the leak.

This whole song and dance is exactly that process.

Fateweaver wrote:Voting for liberal Presidents ruins MY life.

It really, really isn't healthy to build so much of your life focus around the Presidency, to the point where having one you don't like will ruin your life.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:As it currently stands the oil companies are liable for a maximum of $75M economic and $500M environmental damages, BP have already waived that. Yet Obama wants a new law, passed retroactively (which is a miscarriage of justice in itself) to force a much higher cap or even elminiate the cap altogether. BP has made offers to pay for the cleanup and 'all reasonable claims' and various departments including Homeland Security have been asking for legal clarification (remember the bit about the lawyers) as to exactly what that means.

There's a common law precedent here in Australia on opening the floodgates, where the parties who can claim damages are limited to those who suffered direct damage. That is to say, if a boat captain is drunk and drives his boat into a bridge the owner of the bridge can seek compensation, but not every driver on the road. I think this is a pretty reasonable limit on damages.

It makes a lot more sense than a hard cap on damages. If you make a significant screw up somewhat you pay big time, if you make a colossal screw up then you pay as much.


But I agree that there shouldn't be any talk of retroactive changes to the law. It's the kind of silliness that just shouldn't be accepted by prominent political figures.

If the law Orlanth describes were to be enacted, Exxon would likely be in a lot of trouble,

Orlanth wrote:Now it looks pretty bad for oil executives to blame each other, but from looking at the transcripts what was actually happening was each company was only accepting part of the responsibility rather than accepting all of it. This is not in the least bit unfair, as noone wants or should be left to carry the whole can, you tend to regret any idle words when the lawyers come round to feed.

Yet despite This Obama launched an attack on the industries for finger pointing, and them proceded to point the finger himself, at BP and BP alone. I just watched his little speech on CBS online and didnt like what he said. He was chest beating about what he did from 'day one' as if he did it and then was going to armtwist BP to pay for it. In fact its the other way around, most journalists on both sides have reported the ensuing costs by BP on this issue. As Sentators are asking for even the unemployment benefit to be billed to the company, and even for the government to be compensated for lost taxes I am beginning to smell not only rough justice put what could potentially amount to an attack.

As it currently stands the oil companies are liable for a maximum of $75M economic and $500M environmental damages, BP have already waived that. Yet Obama wants a new law, passed retroactively (which is a miscarriage of justice in itself) to force a much higher cap or even elminiate the cap altogether. BP has made offers to pay for the cleanup and 'all reasonable claims' and various departments including Homeland Security have been asking for legal clarification (remember the bit about the lawyers) as to exactly what that means.

This is the US we are talking about, when claims of compensation go way beyond any actual value of damage. Going past the statutory limitations of liability is a good gesture and a good start, but to make promises that lawyers can hold onto bill for and sue for is nothing short of economic suicide. No attempts are made to put the can in the hands of the other companies involved, BP no matter its size can afford unlimited compensation for welfare for three states, let alone what the Sentaros want which appears to be a complete rerfund the local economies GDP. Yes pay for containment, yes pay the bill for the clean up, but as half the profits from the oil rigs go to the US government anyway shouldn't they pay for state losses?

Some se a compensation promise for workers in the 'Gulf states', I see a thinly disguised targeted opportunistic hostile takeover.

It has been noted that he deplored the fingerpointing, then immediately pointesd fingers at the two previous administrations.

I'm waiting for the US to seize all BP property. If Chavez can do it why can't we? Their buildings here are really nice, with onsite Starbucks.

Frazzled wrote:

I'm waiting for the US to seize all BP property. If Chavez can do it why can't we? Their buildings here are really nice, with onsite Starbucks.

I had a look at what Chavez did. The US oil firms Exxon and Chevron walked out of the country, the French company Total was compensated $1B on the way out. BP and the Norwegian guys has been made a 'minor partners' but can stay.
Compensate the French but not the Yanks, why is Obama sucking up to this turkey?

Speaking of which:
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9FNMNMO2.htm

I have heard that the oil drilling companies have been receiving by's on their safety inspections because they helped support the last few presidents. Or something like that. Kinda funny that Obama is pointing the blame at them if it is in any way true.

It would shock people that BO would chide others for finger pointing and then point fingers himself?

He ought to take his own advice. He hasn't done diddly squat to help the economy (it's slow recovery cannot be proven to be attributed to him) and yet he keeps pointing fingers at Clinton and Bush (mostly Bush) and blaming Bush for the failed economy and not actually pointing the finger at himself.

The stimulus didn't do gak, buying out GM and helping AIG didn't do gak and the HCR fiasco is going to put us another trillion plus in debt.

Yeah, BO needs to start taking his own advice when it comes to finger pointing.

Orlanth wrote:...why is Obama sucking up to this turkey?

He's the de facto leader of South American oil suppliers.

The stimulus didn't do gak, buying out GM and helping AIG didn't do gak and the HCR fiasco is going to put us another trillion plus in debt.

These statements are categorically incorrect.

Well, chaining themselves to trees only ruins their lives.

Voting for liberal Presidents ruins MY life.

I might be selfish but I'd rather they ruin their own lives.

I'm pretty sure losing your clerk job and moving in with your friend when you were 34 years old ruined your life. Obamas election just happened at the same time. His election didn't cause you to lose your job and after eight years of conservative presidency one would think you would assume the opposite.

But its unlikely Oblahblah can get this passed- especially the retroactive part. Hes really good at talking about fixing problems, but so far hasn't backed any of that up. With elections coming up he's trying to put up a good show that the Dems are worth re-electing. But if they dont, and he loses the support of house & senate- its really unlikely anything this ridiculous would pass. Which means he'll crack jokes about it when someone else tries to do something practical. Im sure Mr Obama is gonna totally fail to mention that Atlantis rig was given a federal safety award last year too.

He's actively reforming the agencies involved in doing so while separating them to avoid conflicts of interest. He's seemingly aware.

It has been noted that he deplored the fingerpointing, then immediately pointesd fingers at the two previous administrations.

His fingers pointing at the people who are at fault. He's only been in office for two years, and thats not long enough for an appreciable effect on oil drilling or industry policy.

But I agree that there shouldn't be any talk of retroactive changes to the law. It's the kind of silliness that just shouldn't be accepted by prominent political figures.

Agreed.


Keep in mind, BP has been underreporting the damages from the moment this whole thing started. The oft stated amount of oil leakage is a massive underestimate according to most independent observers.

ShumaGorath wrote:

The stimulus didn't do gak, buying out GM and helping AIG didn't do gak and the HCR fiasco is going to put us another trillion plus in debt.

These statements are categorically incorrect.

Well, chaining themselves to trees only ruins their lives.

Voting for liberal Presidents ruins MY life.

I might be selfish but I'd rather they ruin their own lives.

I'm pretty sure losing your clerk job and moving in with your friend when you were 34 years old ruined your life. Obamas election just happened at the same time. His election didn't cause you to lose your job and after eight years of conservative presidency one would think you would assume the opposite.

But its unlikely Oblahblah can get this passed- especially the retroactive part. Hes really good at talking about fixing problems, but so far hasn't backed any of that up. With elections coming up he's trying to put up a good show that the Dems are worth re-electing. But if they dont, and he loses the support of house & senate- its really unlikely anything this ridiculous would pass. Which means he'll crack jokes about it when someone else tries to do something practical. Im sure Mr Obama is gonna totally fail to mention that Atlantis rig was given a federal safety award last year too.

He's actively reforming the agencies involved in doing so while separating them to avoid conflicts of interest. He's seemingly aware.

It has been noted that he deplored the fingerpointing, then immediately pointesd fingers at the two previous administrations.

His fingers pointing at the people who are at fault. He's only been in office for two years, and thats not long enough for an appreciable effect on oil drilling or industry policy.

But I agree that there shouldn't be any talk of retroactive changes to the law. It's the kind of silliness that just shouldn't be accepted by prominent political figures.

Agreed.


Keep in mind, BP has been underreporting the damages from the moment this whole thing started. The oft stated amount of oil leakage is a massive underestimate according to most independent observers.

Wow, you should read posts since you always tell me to.

I didn't have a clerk job; I had an assembly production job and it's my bro I live with, not a friend.

Ya know what, feth it. I'll let you think what you want. This is only Dakka. I don't care if you get your facts wrong. Unlike you I don't lose sleep over someone being wrong on the internet.

The Obama administration is now refusing to send the head of the MMS to testify. Thats a big deal. Not a word will be said in the unbiased mainastream media. The argument that the MMS is involved in anything but a prefunctory way is laughable on its face. they are a rules making entity.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/98209-offshore-drilling-agency-refuses-witness-for-senate-oil-spill-hearing

Frazzled wrote:The Obama administration is now refusing to send the head of the MMS to testify. Thats a big deal. Not a word will be said in the unbiased mainastream media. The argument that the MMS is involved in anything but a prefunctory way is laughable on its face. they are a rules making entity.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/98209-offshore-drilling-agency-refuses-witness-for-senate-oil-spill-hearing

You are saying Aun'O didnt send them, the article says they refused to turn up.

Fateweaver wrote:

Wow, you should read posts since you always tell me to.

I didn't have a clerk job; I had an assembly production job and it's my bro I live with, not a friend.

Ya know what, feth it. I'll let you think what you want. This is only Dakka. I don't care if you get your facts wrong. Unlike you I don't lose sleep over someone being wrong on the internet.

Wow, he argued your points and all you have to come back with is some overblown vitriol about him getting the exact facts of you're life slightly incorrect.

Advantage Shuma... FetéWeaver to serve...

Orlanth wrote:

Frazzled wrote:The Obama administration is now refusing to send the head of the MMS to testify. Thats a big deal. Not a word will be said in the unbiased mainastream media. The argument that the MMS is involved in anything but a prefunctory way is laughable on its face. they are a rules making entity.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/98209-offshore-drilling-agency-refuses-witness-for-senate-oil-spill-hearing

You are saying Aun'O didnt send them, the article says they refused to turn up.

Same thing.

(I should note I'm not blaming the Obama Adminstration for this, just interesting that the most transparent adminstration is hiding)

At the most basic level, I consider what my life would be like as a fishing boat captain, who suddenly, along with all of my colleagues, had that livelyhood abruptly ruined. I see no problem whatsoever with demanding the company that screwed up my own business for making a mistake with theirs. They run a business for profit. Sometimes you win, and make profit, and sometimes you lose and some accident happens. I would rather see the companies involved (who are all busy pointing fingers to save their own butts) pay the actual repairations than having it become a taxpayer burden. They've been profitting for years. Maybe it's time to take responsibility at their own expense, just as they milk the public with unrealistic prices for their own profit. Retroactively or not it makes sense that the one who made the mess should clean it up.

Frazzled wrote:

Orlanth wrote:
You are saying Aun'O didnt send them, the article says they refused to turn up.

Same thing.

Nope, not at all. If there is a differential in the question it is not likely to be the same thing.

I don't see how this can become a 'Blame Obama' rallying cry. Blame big business profiteers drilling and producing oil at any cost. He didn't make that mess, it's just that he doesn't know how to tactfully deal with this problem that ISN'T HIS any better than anyone else. All the anti-liberals who want to take chainsaws to hippies and so forth speak like 5th graders around here. "I'm wanna chainsaw down the trees those dirty hippies chain themselves to... yak yak yak..." is not a particularly eloquent or realistic way of addressing a true disaster caused by HUMAN ERROR, not OBAMA ERROR.

Brainwashed conservatives just want any excuse to jump on the guy. Next thing you know an asteroid will be hurtling towards the Earth and that will be his fault too.

Any of you conservative hatemongers out there actually willing to chainsaw down a tree with a hippie chained to it? Or chain them to a coral reef... and so on... or do you just talk like that because your online so no-one can know how nerdy, fat, spoiled, and useless you really are? At least the "tree huggers" you hate so much have something besides cushy jobs and home mortgages and stock portfolios to back their idealism. Selfish incompetent bastards are at fault. On all levels, companies involved: all of the above, the president or the 'tree-huggers'? Um... yeah way to completely turn a disasterous happenstance into an excuse for anti-liberal attacks. So you hippie-haters go back to not caring about the environment and only caring about hating things. You're as bad as Rush Limbarf if you think Obama is handling this any better than anyone else thrust into this scenario would be handling it... he's handling this like anyone else who has never been put in such a circumstance like this (like, um, everyone?) and using a circumstance like this as a tool to attack the man, or make fun of environmentalists is sadly juvenile.

Actually he stepped into it. By playing the blame game he got involved. I didn't care until he opened his mouth.

Blame the Democrats for Bush and Katrina. he didn't cause that either, and hurricanes are emergency response are state issues.

Well he had to open his mouth. What would have been the response if he just stayed quiet while a disaster is going on? Damned if you do... damned if you don't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
btw 'Blame the democrats for bush'...? That's quite funny.

Guitardian wrote:Well he had to open his mouth. What would have been the response if he just stayed quiet while a disaster is going on? Damned if you do... damned if you don't.

All he had to do was what they were doing. State that we are acting as best we can with the tools we have. Stop there then great. Then he kept going and started blaming all the companies without knowing anything, and then blaming previous administrations. Why? why does he always have to do the (false) blame game?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
btw 'Blame the democrats for bush'...? That's quite funny.

They blamed Bush and FEMA for New Orleans. Thats not what FEMA does. thats not what the federal government does. Switch the D for R and the media would have been all over Obama. Its the poltical blame game.