Obama launched Operation Blame BP from the Oval Office in an attempt to project command of the gulf leak debacle. I did not watch the speech myself. Here's the reason. Because my experience is, when you listen to a guy like a professional politician, he's gonna say all the right things to me. I'm not interested in words. I'm interested in actions.
The NY Times editors are also a bit more interested in actions:
On Tuesday, in his first address from the Oval Office, he vowed to “fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes” and declared that “we will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused.”
Mr. Obama and his team will have to follow through — with more energy and dedication than they have shown so far.
We know that the country is eager for reassurance. We’re not sure the American people got it from a speech that was short on specifics and devoid of self-criticism. Certainly, we hope that Mr. Obama was right when he predicted that in “coming weeks and days,” up to 90 percent of the oil leaking from the well will be captured and the well finally capped by this summer. But he was less than frank about his administration’s faltering efforts to manage this vast environmental and human disaster.
The speech was panned even by Obama's base at MSNBC:
Olbermann: "It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days."
Hm, my presumption that Obama would say all the right things to me may not have been valid.
WOULD IT HAVE HELPED? With all the things that have gone wrong in the gulf, I was expecting Obama to ask Congress to repeal Murphy's Law.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING, BUT WE'RE MAKING GOOD TIME! Peter Wehner of Commentary highlights "one of the worst sections from an Oval Office address ever"; he includes Obama's refutation of skeptics who doubt that we landed a man on the moon, and this deathless passage:
"Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is our capacity to shape our destiny — our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet know precisely how to get there. We know we’ll get there."
Tomorrow is later, but it is scheduled for arrival any day now.
IF DAN RIEHL IS WITH ME,WHO WILL STAND AGAINST ME? Via Glenn, we see this from Dan on the speech:
But given that the reviews are so overwhelmingly bad, it occurred to me - it's what we aren't hearing that's most significant. You can call Obama incompetent and no one is accusing you of racism, any more. Now, that's change!!
Ah hah! Just a few short days ago, I noted that Obama had lost the Rolling Stone and said this:
As a stray thought, we have spent months reading about the racist Tea Partiers, and for months it has seemed obvious that come the fall, desperate Dems would start screaming that everyone opposed to them was racist. That strategy would not be intended to change minds, but it might rally the base a bit. On the heels of the Gulf debacle (and the perceived civil liberties debacle), the race card will be a lot harder to play.
It was ridiculous - war metaphors, a few lies, and a push for cap and tax. Exactly what you would expect.
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 07:32 AM
Barak went to the gulf and got sand in his vagina. It has made him very irritable, and he's looking for some ass to kick.
All I got to say to that is that I, who talks big but am no bad ass, would absolutely bitch slap that skinny piece of shit around wherever I wanted. I say this, because there are about 175,000,000 Americans looking at this girl and saying "Really?", "You're gonna kick MY ass?".
The guy's gonna be flicking cigarette butts at citizens behind phalanxes of secret service agents after the November elections. Then when he returns home to his purported home of Chicago, he will find that it's his turn to be the girl at the "Men's Club". For the rest of his miserable life.
Posted by: Donald | June 16, 2010 at 07:38 AM
Hey - what's with the woman bashing? We are a lot tougher than Obama.
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 07:49 AM
We are the ones we have been waiting for Godot for.
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 07:51 AM
Yes, he couldn't explain how we got here, (the BP favoritism, the climate change chimera, the failure to revoke the Jones Act)
and he doesn't explain how we're getting out)
yeah we're in good hands, putting Mabus and
Nagin in charge,
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 08:01 AM
At least this time, Nagin might remember where the busses are parked.
And is precisely the expertise invoked.
(They're hoping the well dries out, still. Which means this find is HUGE!)
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | June 16, 2010 at 08:08 AM
Obama's schedule today only allots 20 min. for his meeting with BP execs. Apparently, pics of the quasi-prep walks in and out are the main objective...followed by footage of Obama looking and sounding fierce in the Rose Garden.
Meanwhile, FL politicos are finding that publicly threatening to defy the feds/state and act alone to protect their coasts fast tracks their permit requests. A flood of similar rogue actions can't be far behind.
Posted by: DebinNC | June 16, 2010 at 08:12 AM
That it seems to be, Spindletop huge, in it's capacity, which makes more the waste, of not handling it properly.
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 08:17 AM
I think they'll be forced to use a low yield nuke to fuse the tube into glass.
The only thing these people can plan for is Congressional votes.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | June 16, 2010 at 08:22 AM
Given Obama's lousy response to this oil crisis, I'm really dreading that 3 AM phone call about a serious NATIONAL SECURITY crisis.
Posted by: fdcol63 | June 16, 2010 at 08:22 AM
Hillary is truly the only member of Obama's cabinet who has the BALLS to handle a 3 AM call.
Posted by: fdcol63 | June 16, 2010 at 08:24 AM
Honestly,I thought Obama gave a speech of biblical proportions.
Wait. What?
Well,how else would you describe the speech other than:
Ecc 1:14b
Ecc 10:12b-14a:
Posted by: hit and run | June 16, 2010 at 08:27 AM
followed by footage of Obama looking and sounding fierce in the Rose Garden.
mew.
Posted by: Pofarmer | June 16, 2010 at 08:29 AM
Drill less baby, drill less
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70RZzxR8pqU
Posted by: The Bear Party | June 16, 2010 at 08:40 AM
Oooh, a dental hygenist shows up.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | June 16, 2010 at 08:49 AM
Bear Panty,
Your links don't work.
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 08:52 AM
From Drudge just now:
RASMUSSEN Reports at 9:30AM ET:
Obama Approval Falls to New Low: 42%
Obama Approval Index: -20
Strongly Approve 24%
Strongly Disapprove 44%
Total Approval 42%
Developing...
Posted by: centralcal | June 16, 2010 at 08:52 AM
"Ve are not amused" what planet does he think he is on,
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 08:56 AM
CentralCal,
I think you must be off on interpretation of those polling numbers. I am in China, and they seem to be very approving of Obama's current Approval Ratings falling to 42%. In fact I believe they would like it if they collapsed to much lower numbers..
S'pose it's part of weakening American---the more weakening, the better. Hopefully Obama will be able to disappoint them, but I've seen no evidence for it so far.
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 09:02 AM
Drop, baby, drop!
(Obama's approval ratings)
Posted by: fdcol63 | June 16, 2010 at 09:02 AM
He hasn't moved past "BP is bad, BP is going to pay." BP should pay and will pay. However, this policy doesn't prevent one drop of oil from hitting the coasts. Spill containment is job 1. Stopping the leak is job 2. I'd reverse that but stopping the leak is turning out to be very difficult. Obama has no plan other than to punish BP and create a political slush fund. Does he think lawyers absorb oil? Let's hope we survive this idiot.
Joe Biden is beginning to look like the smart, adult, mature part of the team. Scarey thought, isn't it.
Posted by: Bob | June 16, 2010 at 09:05 AM
This is very funny!
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 09:08 AM
Are the balloons up yet, DOT?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | June 16, 2010 at 09:17 AM
"Joe Biden is beginning to look like the smart, adult, mature part of the team. Scarey thought, isn't it."
Absolutely Bob.
On a good day these guys are at best mediocre, and that's being generous.
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 09:18 AM
I find it amusing that Marxist-Socialists have a fetish for appointing "czars".
Posted by: fdcol63 | June 16, 2010 at 09:18 AM
I have talked to several people this morning and not one of them watched the speech. Obama is probably lucky that everyone is sick of him and missed his speech last night.
Posted by: Sue | June 16, 2010 at 09:19 AM
So the new 'argument such as it is in the Sorosphere, is that Sarah's response was incomprehensible, as if direct action is hard to understand
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 09:22 AM
Technically they are commmisars or zampolit, like Peter Firth's not long for this world
character in "Red October"
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 09:23 AM
At the moment BP is content to let Obama try to save himself at their expense, but what will happen when BP's lawyers take over, and it's Obama's toothless threats and Holder's incompetence vs. the law and David Kendall?
Posted by: DebinNC | June 16, 2010 at 09:26 AM
These same idiots claim they want to control the CLIMATE on the entire planet. They can't control one leaking oil well.
That was his speech...We can't stop this oil leak, but put us in charge of controlling climate.
Posted by: Janet | June 16, 2010 at 09:28 AM
What happened when GM bondholder lawyers took over and the rule of law was brought into play?
=================
Posted by: Everywhere a chipmunk. | June 16, 2010 at 09:28 AM
You know Sue, that is probably a very true comment.
Honest folks with common sense and common lives would have been switching from that monstrosity within the first few paragraphs.
Seriously, besides the true believers, or the true patriotic antagonists intent on highlighting whatever new scheme he's come up with to economically neuter America, why would any normal citizen pay the slightest bit of attention to our pontificating idiot?
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 09:28 AM
O/T and maybe this has been linked previously, but this is incredible @ LUN.
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 16, 2010 at 09:33 AM
Whoa, I can't take the flood of negativity here. I'm going to listen to Rush instead. I'm sure he'll have several nice things to say about the speech.
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 09:36 AM
And, just to be a little positive myself:
Ras -20 today
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 09:36 AM
From Captain's linked article -
Sheriff Paul Babeu: "... And, it’s shameful that we as the most powerful nation on earth can win wars and liberate countries throughout history yet we can’t even secure our own border."
Posted by: Janet | June 16, 2010 at 09:38 AM
Narciso,
Wouldn't you love it if Todd Palin walked next door and administered the same "hug" to creep stalker McGiniss that the Wapo's Weigel considers completely appropriate by that North Carolina Congressman Etheridge.
Heck, I would hope that after such friendly banter, Todd Palin might actually invite Joe over for some friendly "swimming"in the lake behind their Wasilla houses. Kumbaya!
Posted by: daddy | June 16, 2010 at 09:41 AM
Re Captain Hate's LUN at 9:33 AM: We need a President Polk type to deal with the Mexican border, and instead we have a Carter-lite type.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | June 16, 2010 at 09:46 AM
Weigel is all forms of fail, MacGuiness thought he could corner the Akhanitsa, but
she's evaded him, like those rolling MX trailers
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 09:47 AM
And one of the reasons I support Palin for Prez in 2012 is that I think there is a good deal of James Knox Polk fortitude in her.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | June 16, 2010 at 09:47 AM
No balloons, TC. We're not gonna let Bill Russell dine out on that story for another forty years.
When the likes of Olbermann and Matthews start bringing up Carter, you know the corner has been turned. This guy has lost the country; no one pays attention to him anymore.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM
Thinking back to that Batchelor piece linked by Dan Riehl yesterday, I have to wonder how much more depressed Obama is today. Where's the love?
But, hey, he is gonna give it his all in a 20 minute meeting with BP. The putz just gets putzier.
Posted by: centralcal | June 16, 2010 at 10:14 AM
The man is lazy.
Posted by: Sue | June 16, 2010 at 10:16 AM
When Obama loses three progressive homers like Olbermann, Matthews and Fineman, you know it was a bad speech. This was one instance where Olbermann actually made me chuckle.
Posted by: Tom R | June 16, 2010 at 10:19 AM
Joseph Cao distinguishes himself again:
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 10:21 AM
The man is lazy.
Posted by: Sue | June 16, 2010 at 10:16 AM
AND INCOMPETENT!
He is a hardcore Alinsky Leftist, we should all be grateful that he is organizationally incompetent and has no leadership ability.
Posted by: NK | June 16, 2010 at 10:25 AM
The AP fact-checks the speech, and it ain't pretty.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Looks like Fannie and Freddie might delist from the NYSE.
Haven't they been listening to Barney Frank that there are absolutely no problems?
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Favreau's youth and inexperience is really starting to come out. I mean, sure anyone can write a great speech if they just crib it from the greatest 100 speeches of the last 50 years. Much like Web 2.0, of which Obama's campaign probably makes him the first Web 2.0 President, the reality is that there isn't much real WORK being done as TALKING about work.
Posted by: Tollhouse | June 16, 2010 at 10:32 AM
Completely off topic, but of some interest, the newest Blago album has been released.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | June 16, 2010 at 10:41 AM
Perfect Speech coming from a true Narcissist:
Narcissistic personality disorder is a condition in which there is an inflated sense of self-importance and an extreme preoccupation with one's self.
A person with narcissistic personality disorder:
* Reacts to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation
* Takes advantage of other people to achieve his or her own goals
* Has feelings of self-importance
* Exaggerates achievements and talents
* Is preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, beauty, intelligence, or ideal love
* Has unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment
* Requires constant attention and admiration
* Disregards the feelings of others, lacks empathy
* Has obsessive self-interest
* Pursues mainly selfish goals
Posted by: PDinDetroit | June 16, 2010 at 10:41 AM
PD,
How lucky for democrats that a republican said something stupid. Forgive me if I am now open to conspiracy theories that would have made laugh 2 years ago.
Posted by: Sue | June 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Lawmakers are fuming at BP, but Rep. Joseph Cao took that anger to a new level during a congressional hearing when he suggested a top executive commit ritual suicide.
Ugh.
Why do we get such clowns?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | June 16, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Exactly Tollhouse. Talking about work. Has there been even one tangible solution to any problem? Libs talk us all to death and drown us in paper/regulation. Leaving a trail of ruin...they march on to the next Utopian dream.
Posted by: Janet | June 16, 2010 at 10:45 AM
The man is lazy.
AND INCOMPETENT!
And apparently scared.
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 10:51 AM
After considerable searching, I finally found a fawning sycophant who actually thinks (or says he thinks) the speech was great. Apparently The Forehead has been living on Olbermann's alternate planet for the last 58 days.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Cao's the RINO who was the only Republican 'yes' vote on the original House healthcare bill. The only issue he's reliable on is abortion.
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 10:56 AM
That's funny Dot, I was gonna say "Begala thought it was great" and then I went to your link. I bet he is the only one.
BTW Chris Matthews has a special on the Tea parties tonite - this morning he was comparing tea party members to the Michigan Militia. I blogged about it at You TOO.
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Sorry Dude, but only Lantos has the gravitas to poll that off, and those were different circumstances
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 11:00 AM
Sounds like AL Gov. Riley is ready to follow Jindal's lead and go rogue.
Tidbit from link: OSHA will only let cleanup folks work 20 min. out of each hour. I guess requiring 3 people do the job of 1 is one way to help BO's jobs-created stats.
Posted by: DebinNC | June 16, 2010 at 11:02 AM
BTW Chris Matthews has a special on the Tea parties tonite
I've noticed the commercials have an image of the Obama "Joker" poster. I suppose he's going to claim that was created by a Tea Partier?
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 11:03 AM
And in related news:
http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/204251/obama-officially-embraces-lame-duck-session-strategy>Obama Officially Embraces the Lame-Duck Session Strategy
The plan is to conference the new Senate [energy] bill with the already-passed House bill IN A LAME-DUCK SESSION AFTER THE ELECTION, so House members don’t have to take another tough vote ahead of midterms.
Posted by: Ranger | June 16, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Does he actually think he has the power to do that? Is he really going to try? What if the Chairman says "we feel the courts should determine who gets what, in accordance with the ancient traditions of the law in the English-speaking countries?"
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 11:05 AM
The campaign slogan "OBAMA.... competent as CARTER" comes to mind.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | June 16, 2010 at 11:11 AM
".. requiring 3 people do the job of 1 .. "
Just like unions.
Posted by: fdcol63 | June 16, 2010 at 11:12 AM
Does he actually think he has the power to do that? Is he really going to try? What if the Chairman says "we feel the courts should determine who gets what, in accordance with the ancient traditions of the law in the English-speaking countries?"
Then the chairman gets a polite reminder of what happened to the GM bondholders.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | June 16, 2010 at 11:13 AM
Patrick Michaels at The Corner on Obama's moon landing comparison:
In his Deepwater Horizon speech, President Obama erroneously compared the effort required to reduce per capita emissions of carbon dioxide to what they were in 1867 — which is the goal of the cap-and-trade legislation passed by the House last summer — to our landing men on the moon. He implied that it’s okay to go this route, even if we don’t know how to do it. In fact, we knew how to send men to the moon: with big rockets and a disposable lunar lander. We have no idea how to reduce the per capita carbon consumption of 400 million Americans to what it was immediately after the Civil War — absolutely no idea.
Posted by: DebinNC | June 16, 2010 at 11:13 AM
In the IT World, when we have an issue the size and scope of the Gulf Oil Spill, it would be termed a Severity 1 Incident on a Critical System. For this type of system, you generally have 30 minutes to get the system back functional - resolve the incident. For this incident, the following would occur:
1. Both Technical and Business Impact Meet-Me-Lines would be opened and an Incident Manager Assigned.
2. Groups and individuals that can aid in resolving the incident are brought to the Technical Line and all angles/information are checked out. It is an "All Hands On-Deck" scenario.
3. The Business Line is updated 30-60 minutes with up-to-minute status.
4. A Resolution Plan is developed and enacted. The incident is resolved and follow-up plans are created and run to clean-up ancillary problems.
5. Once Incident Management has resolved the issue, Problem Management can take over interaction with vendors and updating processes to ensure that the incident does not occur again.
(very simplistic version above for the sake of reader time)
I see no urgency in the actions of the US Government. I see no reality-based plan to resolve the incident quickly. We The People have been kept in the dark about many aspects of the Gulf Oil Spill. Future Policy work has no business being discussed while the incident is still on-going.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | June 16, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Then the chairman gets a polite reminder of what happened to the GM bondholders.
What happened to the GM bondholders was done by a bankruptcy court.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Where has Clarice been? Is she off gallivanting somewhere?
Posted by: Jane | June 16, 2010 at 11:50 AM
"2. Groups and individuals that can aid in resolving the incident are brought to the Technical Line and all angles/information are checked out. It is an "All Hands On-Deck" scenario..."
PD, there's your problem. That process can't possibly work because you don't bring in a Nobel Prize winner to suggest solutions, and you don't appoint a panel of college professors to study the problem for six months with the charge to come up with a consensus opinion in nine months.
You've just told us that you have no experience in dealing with a major crises.
/snark off
Posted by: LouP | June 16, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Obama: the Half-Assed Half-Caste.
Posted by: macphisto | June 16, 2010 at 11:52 AM
What happened to the GM bondholders was done by a bankruptcy court.
I thought the deal with the bondholders was arranged prior to the bankruptcy (as in the LUN). I suppose the court validated it, but my impression was that Treasury persuaded enough of the bondholders to accept the deal despite strong opposition from the rest.
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 11:53 AM
The last laugh on the spill will always belong to Obama because no matter how you slice it or spin it or mutilate it -- BP CAUSED THE SPILL. And the longer, stronger and more desperate the hypothesizing gets about what could have been done ex post facto, the clearer it becomes that the answer is: not much.
How hard will it be for to show beyond dispute that the problem was that drilling in the location was simply too dangerous, given the inevitable consequences of the spill and that such warnings were ignored and that BP succeeded in ignoring them because it relied on advocates vociferously opposed to government regulation and who deployed ideological arguments to "defend" that stance? How hard will it be to show that NEXT TIME and NOW in the PRESENT, the question surely isn't whether the government will be capable of seizing control from the private companies that caused the disaster and magically achieving what the private sector cannot, but how in the world future accidents can be prevented. And as soon as the discussion arrives there, and you can be absolutely sure it will, all this hyperventilating about Obama's inability to magically soak up all that spilled out will be about as relevant as the winning North Korean lottery numbers.
Posted by: bunkerbuster | June 16, 2010 at 11:55 AM
A spill like this happens every thirty years or so, the last under a nationalized Mexican
company, Pemex, Ixtoc, or oil tankers like
the Cadiz, off the coast of France as I recall. A start would be to dust off the contingency plan that NOAA developed in 1994, and follow the dictates of the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990, I know that isn't as exciting as
unicorn dust, but it reality
Posted by: narciso | June 16, 2010 at 12:04 PM
My understanding of the oil spill coming onshore is that the aroma makes people sick. So perhaps that's why OSHA is limiting workers time cleaning up the gunk.
Posted by: glasater | June 16, 2010 at 12:07 PM
didn't we used to have an agency called the Federal Emergency Management Agency? Or does the president think so little of an agency that could actually manage emergencies, especially after the blowup in the wake of Katrina, that this is now just a GS-5 with a couple of telephones on his desk.
The whole management of this crisis has been criminally negligent from the top downwards. We have been fed a steady diet of lies and bullshit from the outset, and our media hasn't dared to ask the hard questions.
We need to empower people like Jindal and others who will get the job done.
The plans for a neutron bomb are lying in some vault at the DOE, and they should tailor one with the right kilotonnage and directional attributes to close this thing down. There are also Mk 48's with warheads that would work loaded on subs as we speak, but those are dirty.
Conversely, they could jam a few Mk 48's with dummy warheads right down the hole, depending on the flow rate.
I'm sure Dr. Chu's experts are considering all the options. Remain calm, all is well.....
Posted by: matt | June 16, 2010 at 12:09 PM
CDS rates on muni bonds on the gulf states are ticking up.
Posted by: glasater | June 16, 2010 at 12:09 PM
"President Obama is drawing bipartisan criticism for using the BP oil spill to revive an energy regulation bill that's been on the back burner since last year..."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein: "the climate bill isn't going to stop the oil leak."
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 12:13 PM
And as soon as the discussion arrives there, and you can be absolutely sure it will, all this hyperventilating about Obama's inability to magically soak up all that spilled out will be about as relevant as the winning North Korean lottery numbers.
Posted by: bunkerbuster | June 16, 2010 at 11:55 AM
Really? That's all you've got today? Hope that the discourse will change in your favor. Well it worked once I guess.
Oh, and by the way, "How hard will it be..."? Obviously pretty damn hard, since Obama had all the time he wanted to try last night and he clearly failed.
Posted by: Ranger | June 16, 2010 at 12:13 PM
Are all things equal?
Posted by: Threadkiller | June 16, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Rush just called Bill O'Reilly "Ted Baxter". Ouch.
Posted by: Sue | June 16, 2010 at 12:16 PM
gallivanting...now there's a good old word I haven't heard in awhile. Mental note - use the word gallivant more often!
Verb 1. gallivant - wander aimlessly in search of pleasure
Dare to be Dull...Dare to Gallivant!Posted by: Janet | June 16, 2010 at 12:16 PM
--The last laugh on the spill will always belong to Obama because no matter how you slice it or spin it or mutilate it -- BP CAUSED THE SPILL.--
Yes and the earth's natural processes caused Katrina, but that didn't help Bush any and BP's liability aint helping Barry.
Just as it turned out most of the avoidable harm from Katrina could not be laid at Bush's feet but he ws blamed anyway, the fact is when an entity takes over a problem the head of that entity is held responsible. And Barry has been demonstrably slower off the mark and less active than Bush was and his own administration provided waivers and safety awards to BP.
Barry isn't laughing because he knows, as of early April when Napalitano or whoever it was, declared it a spill of national significance and the EPA and CG took over, Barry's head got placed on the same pike Bush's was. Some in the media may try and shield him but so far that's mot working out too well is it?
Laugh it up.
Posted by: Ignatz | June 16, 2010 at 12:17 PM
And let's not forget, Bush caused Katrina.
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 12:19 PM
Oops, Iggy beat me to it, minus the sarc.
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 12:20 PM
Why does anyone care what the homoerotic fantasizer says?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | June 16, 2010 at 12:29 PM
Re: Bush and Katrina, if you have access to Karl Rove's new book, I encourage you to grab it and read the chapter about Katrina. Very interesting insider account of just how engaged Bush was, and the obstacles he faced trying to get Nagin and Blanco to understand what they were up against, what their responsibilities were, and to quit trying to blame each other.
Bottom line: Of the three, only Bush had the slightest clue how to deal with the situation. The background detail provided by Rove is fascinating. And Bush's restraint in not ripping Blanco/Nagin is striking.
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 12:38 PM
This just in (from the WJ):
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting.
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 12:38 PM
WJ=WSJ
Posted by: jimmyk | June 16, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Oh, and Rove also has some interesting comments on Mary Landrieu's response to Katrina. Not, shall we say, complimentary.
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 12:39 PM
one of the other issues with the 20 minute rule is the weather. It's very hot, and Tyvek suits don't breathe, so the risks of dehydration and stroke are real.
The problem is that they are cleaning up the beaches, not the seas. The best solution is always closest to the source of the problem. The cat got out on this one 8 weeks ago.
Posted by: matt | June 16, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Captain Hate:
Your link">http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/06/obama-gives-major-strip-of-arizona-back-to-mexico-video/">link if horrific!
The real reason for closing National Parks to us ties into the carbon scam.
And:
Can you believe they will use any excuse for their "land grab"? Don't answer that.
Posted by: Threadkiller | June 16, 2010 at 12:42 PM
--Why does anyone care what the homoerotic fantasizer says?--
For the same reason we swat at gnats.
Posted by: Ignatz | June 16, 2010 at 12:43 PM
Didn't watch or hear the speech, but I read this highlight just now and laughed:
Eh? We're going to shape it even though we don't know what it looks like? We're going to get somewhere (where?) even though we don't know how?
Who is writing this stuff?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 12:52 PM
DoT, that bit of fluff doesn't fill you with confidence in our President?
Posted by: PD | June 16, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Who is writing this stuff?
A couple of beer-pong playing frat boys, from what I understand.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | June 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM
Everyone coming up with reasons for the 20 minute rule.
It's in effect when they are not in Tyvek, just long pants, sleeveless white shirts, and black boots.
It's in effect in areas where there is no oil coming in and no smell whatsoever.
It was in effect at 8:00 AM when it was not yet hot.
The BP mini jeeps deliver and erect canopies for the workers to sit under for those 40 minutes before walking for 20.
Yesterday 4 workers were moving the canopy down the beach with the rest of the workers underneath as if it was a pharoah's canopy.
That probably counted as the 20 minute walk too.
At least I didn't see any prison pants today but it's still a rough looking and acting group to be rewarded with BP's munificent hourly wages.
Posted by: rse | June 16, 2010 at 01:02 PM
The $20B fund looks to me like a pretty successful move for Obama. I'd love to know whether and how BP limited its liability to that sum--they may very well not have been able to.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | June 16, 2010 at 01:02 PM
The BP mini jeeps deliver and erect canopies for the workers to sit under for those 40 minutes before walking for 20.
You'd think no one's ever worked out in the sun before.
We have sunscreen, cheap ice, lots of drinking water, and even specially crafted drinks to help you stay hydrated, folks!
Posted by: Rob Crawford | June 16, 2010 at 01:06 PM