• 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!

Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill

We haven't even seen the full effects of this oil spill but we can be sure that's it's comparable to the worst natural disaster in the history of the country? Is that really what you're saying?


You are right, it's nothing, just a little oil. B+ Obama! :thumbs:


Lol, what's you're problem with women? Do you really think so little of women that it should degrade a man to be compared to one?


Like i said, if you want to mouth off at me, I suggest the basement.



Read your last post and decipher for yourself who's really whining, lol. :shrug:



I did, you. :shrug:
 
Is anyone surprised that the "blame Obama like the liberals blamed Bush for Katrina" line has already emerged? I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner.




I'm actually suprised at the blatant hypocrisy and disregard for the environment you all are displaying to protect your god king.
 
Gotta love these mouth foamers trying to avoid the topic by talking only about the Greatness that is the Good Reverend.....



Why is it, Obama gets a pass for the failure to implement the 1994 plan while bush gets the blame for FEMA's failures?


hypocrites got nothing but big mouths to avoid not looking like partisan mouth foaming hacks. :thumbs:
 
Why is it, Obama gets a pass for the failure to implement the 1994 plan while bush gets the blame for FEMA's failures?

First find someone who has actually said that, then you can start talking about hypocrisy.
 
I'm less interested in this because the government should've been involved in this and much more interested in the media response. Katrina was greatly laid on Bush in the media with far less attention given to the Mayor and Governor outside of conservative channels, yet here all you keep hearing is "BP should've done this". Where are the sensationalized stories about what Obama was doing while this disaster was happening like the ones we got with Bush on the Ranch.

Obama wasn't on vacation. I enjoy how you are - comparing government built levees breaking and killing 1,000 people while the government does nothing and the president clears brush - to - a private company not following mandated procedures and as a result having a catastrophe on its hands. Quite the "comparable" scenarios I guess.
 
Last edited:
First find someone who has actually said that, then you can start talking about hypocrisy.



Right, what grade to you give obama in tis disaster?



Does he hold any responsibility in the failure of the federal government to implement its 1994 plan?
 
I'm actually suprised at the blatant hypocrisy and disregard for the environment you all are displaying to protect your god king.

What hypocrisy? What exactly have I said about Obama, or Bush, and their respective responsibilities for these disasters? Quote me.
 
What hypocrisy? What exactly have I said about Obama, or Bush, and their respective responsibilities for these disasters? Quote me.





I won't bother, because even if I did, you would't see it pass all your mouth foam. besides, I asked you directly. Please answer the question.
 
Right, what grade to you give obama in tis disaster?



Does he hold any responsibility in the failure of the federal government to implement its 1994 plan?

Oh, wow, now you're finally asking instead of assuming.

So you can stop the accusations of hypocrisy since you have no information, at least not from me.

For the record, I don't blame Obama for not implementing this plan. It's a minor issue from 16 years ago. If anyone is to blame, it's the people in the Clinton administration.

But here's my larger take on it - playing the blame game for something like this is silly. You can't hold a President responsible for every little detail, or for deciding that every little project wasn't worth the money even if they were proven wrong. Again, hindsight is 20/20. So on this fire boom thing, I don't blame Clinton, Bush, or Obama.
 
I won't bother, because even if I did, you would't see it pass all your mouth foam. besides, I asked you directly. Please answer the question.

Just did.

You're the one foaming at the mouth. Just stop.
 
Why is it, Obama gets a pass for the failure to implement the 1994 plan while bush gets the blame for FEMA's failures?

Obama get's blame for not having fire booms on hand. You're right. Other than that they've done a great job with the problem, especially considering the terrible weather that hasn't helped in the least.

Bush gets blame for the metric ****-ton of stuff that went wrong during and after Katrina, including the lack of funding and the missalocation of funds that were supposed to help rebuild. Trying to compare the two is ridiculous.
 
Is anyone surprised that the "blame Obama like the liberals blamed Bush for Katrina" line has already emerged? I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner.

****, they had that line all packaged up before Obama was inaugurated.
 
Obama get's blame for not having fire booms on hand. You're right. Other than that they've done a great job with the problem, especially considering the terrible weather that hasn't helped in the least.

Bush gets blame for the metric ****-ton of stuff that went wrong during and after Katrina, including the lack of funding and the missalocation of funds that were supposed to help rebuild. Trying to compare the two is ridiculous.

I really blame Bush for his idiot decision of giving those nee'rdowells those checks for $2000 to help them buy food, clothing, and help them get back on their feet. How many lap dances and hookers did that cost us taxpayers?
 
I really blame Bush for his idiot decision of giving those nee'rdowells those checks for $2000 to help them buy food, clothing, and help them get back on their feet. How many lap dances and hookers did that cost us taxpayers?

There's really no telling. I can't tell you how many big screen tv's were purchased with those debit cards.
 
Funny, I never heard that

You should read the news more often.

Burning the Oil Off? Weather Is the Hitch - Green Blog - NYTimes.com

AccuWeather.com - Weather News | Weather to Deteriorate Over Oil Slick

Weather Hurts Gulf Oil Fight; Wildlife in Peril - CBS News

Once waves hit 3 feet, you can't burn.

Besides with no fire booms available, The Obama Administration has failed at least as much as the Bush administration has failed with Katrina.

How is not having equipment you can't use a failure?

They should, but unlike you, I am not willing to destroy thousands of miles of gulf coast and entire fishing industries to punish "big oil". :shrug:

LOL. Your pedestrian attack needs work.
 
What is worse, the Leader that is an idiot?? Or the person who follows him??
 


May 3rd, thats 14 days too late. Sorry. the weather excuse does not measure up 14 days later. :shrug:





April 28? 8 days later they are saying the weather would deteriorate, indicating the weather was fine those 8 days.





10 days later. :shrug:


How is not having equipment you can't use a failure?


As I have proven by your links, they had about 14 days to use this equipment.

According to at least one expert, 95% of the oil could have been contained.


Gouguet speculated that burning could have captured 95 percent of the oil as it spilled from the well.

Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill | al.com


Even if he was only 25% right, that makes this failure of government all that more tragic.


LOL. Your pedestrian attack needs work.



Well then, please explain why you are making excuses for this government, when clearly I have proven they screwed the pooch on this one.
 
May 3rd, thats 14 days too late. Sorry. the weather excuse does not measure up 14 days later. :shrug:

April 28? 8 days later they are saying the weather would deteriorate, indicating the weather was fine those 8 days.

10 days later. :shrug:

http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/data/realtime2/42887.txt

FAIL.

The biggest reason you "win" any argument is that people don't put the time in to getting the hard data to prove you're wrong. Took me some time to find that off NOAA's website. Check the 9th column from the left. Pretty much every day after the accident wave action prevented burn offs.

As I have proven by your links, they had about 14 days to use this equipment.

Try again. Unless you want to argue that NOAA is a socialistic evil liberal organization. :2wave:

You really outta to stop getting your information from blogs.

Well then, please explain why you are making excuses for this government, when clearly I have proven they screwed the pooch on this one.

Only if you ignore the actual data. Btw, before you embarrass yourself again, that's meters, not feet for the unit of measure in the 9th column
 
What happened to "Yes we can?".

Yes we can... read divisive speeches from le teleprompteur.
Yes we can... demonize republicans.
Yes we can... piss on our police.
Yes we can... nationalize industries.
Yes we can... crap on Wall Street.
Yes we can... socialize healthcare.
Yes we can... side with illegal aliens.
Yes we can... foster racial divisiveness.

WHY?

Because... "Now is the time we have been waiting for."

This is what we have been waiting for?
OK... BUT...

... Hey Obi...

Day 1... we're waiting.
Day 2... And waiting.
Day 3... and waiting.
Day 4... And waiting.
Day 5... and waiting.
Day 6... And waiting.
Day 7... and waiting.
Day 8... And waiting.
Day 9... and waiting.
...

Can we say... Epic Fail? I think we can.

I think I know why it is taking so long.

Obi is waiting to astound the world with his Biblical Powers.
The man who can control the ebb and flow of the oceans, a wee little oil spill ought to represent little trouble.

But... we're waiting...

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQNkVmdicvA&feature=related"]YouTube- Obama Claiming He Can Halt the Rise of the Oceans[/nomedia]

.
 
http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/data/realtime2/42887.txt

FAIL.

The biggest reason you "win" any argument is that people don't put the time in to getting the hard data to prove you're wrong. Took me some time to find that off NOAA's website. Check the 9th column from the left. Pretty much every day after the accident wave action prevented burn offs.


uhm, am I missing something? its under 3 feet on several days, the maximum you claim these things work at, though you haven't backed it up.



Try again. Unless you want to argue that NOAA is a socialistic evil liberal organization. :2wave:


Now your being obtuse with a moronic strawman. Why would I suggest NOAA is a socialistic evil organization?


Can you debate without acting so foolish?



You really outta to stop getting your information from blogs.



Only if you ignore the actual data. Btw, before you embarrass yourself again, that's meters, not feet for the unit of measure in the 9th column



Speaking of embarrasment, so you think acting like a tough guy on the internet with your snotty attitude is anything but embarrassing?


there are several days where the waves are below 3 feet to which is the number you claimed, that I have yet to see proof. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
uhm, am I missing something? its under 3 meters for several of those days, which is less than 3 feet, the maximum you claim these things work at, though you haven't backed it up.

:confused::confused::confused:

:2razz:
 
On another note:

Do we realize the Obama, just a month ago approved offshore oil drilling to begin without requiring his campaign contributors (BP) to put in an auto-shut-down valve on their rigs, and then when the spill happens, pretends its no big deal to avoid raising attention. Unfortunately for Obama, it was a massive spill and now its too late to stop the catastrophe.


Also OC, you have just been exposed...


http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/learning/booms.htm


Fence booms have a high freeboard and a flat flotation device, making them least effective in rough water, where wave and wind action can cause the boom to twist.

Round or curtain booms have a more circular flotation device and a continuous skirt. They perform well in rough water, but are more difficult to clean and store than fence booms.


Non-rigid or inflatable booms come in many shapes. They are easy to clean and store, and they perform well in rough seas. However, they tend to be expensive, more complicated to use, and puncture and deflate easily.



So two out of three types perform well in rough seas.


Your entire argument regarding wave heights has been served.
 
Last edited:
uhm, am I missing something? its under 3 feet on several days, the maximum you claim these things work at, though you haven't backed it up.

Check your units again. Oh boy. You did do what I thought you would have.

Now your being obtuse with a moronic strawman. Why would I suggest NOAA is a socialistic evil organization?

Because you tend to do that sort of thing.

there are several days where the waves are below 3 feet to which is the number you claimed, that I have yet to see proof. :shrug:

Ah, that's because you don't know the difference between M and ft.
 
Back
Top Bottom