CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › President Obama to address the nation on the BP Oil Spill
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

President Obama to address the nation on the BP Oil Spill

post #1 of 124
6/14/10 at 9:41am
Thread Starter 


He has a prime time address from the Oval Office this Tuesday night. Frankly I wish he'd done this a few weeks ago, if for no other reason than it would have been better politics. All the same, I'm curious to see what he has to say.


FYI This will be the President's first address to the nation from the Oval Office
Reply
post #2 of 124
6/14/10 at 10:38am
It's too late to pull that stern look off now. He's sold it the wrong way. If he had done something like this a month ago, maybe. But now, it's just too late.
Reply
post #3 of 124
6/14/10 at 10:40am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
It's too late to pull that stern look off now. He's sold it the wrong way. If he had done something like this a month ago, maybe. But now, it's just too late.
Eh, maybe. I don't know. We'll see what he has to say. I don't disagree that I'd have liked to see him using this disaster as an opportunity to end this silly "drill baby drill" BS, but we'll see what he says.
Reply
post #4 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:13am
Short of storming in and basically nationalizing BP, what more was he supposed to have done?
Reply
post #5 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:27am
Being a bit more pro-active with the spill.
Reply
post #6 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:40am
My problem with it is that he's giving the perception like there's only one thing to do, so let's have BP take care of it.

I remember a few weeks ago Bobby Jindal talking about getting funds for booms or barrier islands (don't quite remember what).

If I was in Obama's shoes, I'd be telling BP and/or my government to enact as many contingency plans as possible regardless if they might fail or not. At this point, can it really get any worse (besides more oil, of course)?
Reply
post #7 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
Short of storming in and basically nationalizing BP, what more was he supposed to have done?
And I think our government might have had something to say about that.

The cynic in me thinks there would be less pressure if it was an American company that had caused the disaster.
Reply
post #8 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompoussory Estoppel View Post
My problem with it is that he's giving the perception like there's only one thing to do, so let's have BP take care of it.

I remember a few weeks ago Bobby Jindal talking about getting funds for booms or barrier islands (don't quite remember what).

If I was in Obama's shoes, I'd be telling BP and/or my government to enact as many contingency plans as possible regardless if they might fail or not. At this point, can it really get any worse (besides more oil, of course)?
This.

You know you've screwed up when you make Bobby Jindal look competent and capable of leadership.
Reply
post #9 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:35pm
Well, as to the sand berms, it's possible that they might be more of a problem than an answer. Perhaps that's why the government has been so slow to act upon it.

Scientist Warns Sand Berms Won't Last
Reply
post #10 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick View Post
Being a bit more pro-active with the spill.
My friend works for the EPA. Believe me, Obama's administration is doing everything they can to figure out how to stop this thing. But BP are the "experts". We had to give them the opportunity to fix their mistake. Now that its clear that they can't, the US has brought in their own scientists to come up with solutions. Unfortunately, there aren't too many people who know how to stop this leak. The last time I talked to my friend, she said things were still looking quite bleak. The sad reality is that no one knows what to do.
Reply
post #11 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
Short of storming in and basically nationalizing BP, what more was he supposed to have done?
He could have put on a much better dog and pony show. It's totally superficial, but still far from useless.
Reply
post #12 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:47pm
Thread Starter 
I don't see why we can't try a bomb. I don't think it would have to be a nuke for it to shatter the rocks and close this fissure.
Reply
post #13 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Kate View Post
I don't see why we can't try a bomb. I don't think it would have to be a nuke for it to shatter the rocks and close this fissure.
Michio Kaku was on Olbermann like 2 weeks ago and addressed this. He said that there was too much uncertainty as to what would happen if a bomb was detonated. It could work, but it could also create multiple holes and make our problem possibly 10 times worse.
Reply
post #14 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeypants View Post
He could have put on a much better dog and pony show. It's totally superficial, but still far from useless.
And then people would've accused him of putting on a dog and pony show to cover up how bad things are. It's a no win situation, really.

Insert old proverb about it being better to remain silent and be thought a fool.
Reply
post #15 of 124
6/14/10 at 12:56pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompoussory Estoppel View Post
Michio Kaku was on Olbermann like 2 weeks ago and addressed this. He said that there was too much uncertainty as to what would happen if a bomb was detonated. It could work, but it could also create multiple holes and make our problem possibly 10 times worse.
Ah ok, thanks. I have not been watching much TV lately (the circut breaker for the downstairs TV blew and I don't want to reset it, and I don't like watching cable upstairs), so I appreciate this info
Reply
post #16 of 124
6/14/10 at 1:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post
And then people would've accused him of putting on a dog and pony show to cover up how bad things are. It's a no win situation, really.

Insert old proverb about it being better to remain silent and be thought a fool.
No this is very true. Which is why, outside of the occasional reactionary asshole rant I go on here (which, hey, I'm in the 'danger zone' so to speak, I'm allowed certain concessions), I don't really criticize that aspect of it too much.
Reply
post #17 of 124
6/14/10 at 1:13pm
I mean, there's plenty he can do with regards to the clean-up and easing the financial blow to those affected, and he has been. But it's almost as if some people are pissed he's not down there in a submarine plugging the hole himself. And let's not discount BP's foot-dragging in the early stages when they tried to convince everyone this wasn't a big deal.
Reply
post #18 of 124
6/14/10 at 3:08pm
He needs to push green technology and sustainable energy like no tomorrow. In a way this tragedy is a gift on the scale of 9/11 for Bush. That's how they should view it anyway. It should allow them to push for it in a huge way. Not only would it create jobs, but anyone who pushes back could be cast as part of the problem since they could be linked to old fashioned forms of fuel, including oil.

Of course the Republican spin will be that Obama is using a national tragedy to force tax payers to support tree hugging blah blah blah. Just watch. If he pushes hard enough, they'll freak out and forget all about the spill.

Basically, what this boils down to is whether or not enough Americans will care to say they want a huge change in technology. It's easy for everyone to criticize the handling of the oil spill. It's going to be harder when they're asked to do something about it and they're all like, "WE LUV ERR CARRRRS DNT CHNAGE NUTTIN!"
Reply
post #19 of 124
6/14/10 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post
Of course the Republican spin will be that Obama is using a national tragedy to force tax payers to support tree hugging blah blah blah. Just watch. If he pushes hard enough, they'll freak out and forget all about the spill.
They'll do that no matter what Obama actually does. He might as well earn it.
Reply
post #20 of 124
6/14/10 at 3:34pm
Yeah, agreed. What bothers me more are the groups of people that listen to them. They're the same group that's being incredibly critical of the administration for not doing enough now.
Reply
post #21 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:09pm
"Not doing things I agree with" = "Not doing enough"

"Doing things I disagree with" = "Doing too much"
Reply
post #22 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:11pm
It's ridiculous seeing these Free Market Assholes whining that not enough Federal money has been put into this. Choose a fucking stance.
Reply
post #23 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:29pm
"Privatize winnings, socialize losses" is a coherent stance though.
Reply
post #24 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf View Post
It's ridiculous seeing these Free Market Assholes whining that not enough Federal money has been put into this. Choose a fucking stance.
Oh man, tell me about it. Especially living down here in conservative country. It's shocking how many of these people want government handouts NOW.
Reply
post #25 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post
He needs to push green technology and sustainable energy like no tomorrow. In a way this tragedy is a gift on the scale of 9/11 for Bush. That's how they should view it anyway. It should allow them to push for it in a huge way. Not only would it create jobs, but anyone who pushes back could be cast as part of the problem since they could be linked to old fashioned forms of fuel, including oil.
Yeah, this. His reluctance to even back down from possible future drilling is what pisses me off the most about his actions. And it's clear he's letting BP take the lead to an unacceptable degree.

If he uses the last month as an excuse to say "You guys had your chance, now out of the way," then fine, but I fear he's honestly too beholden to his Reagan-style "keep big government out of it" principles. Ironically enough, given the Republican response.

And it'll be hard for anyone to "forget" about the oil spill for the next few months. This really is a golden opportunity, one which I fear Obama won't be willing to take.
Reply
post #26 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeypants View Post
Oh man, tell me about it. Especially living down here in conservative country. It's shocking how many of these people want government handouts NOW.
Yeah, it's the whole "I'm only a Libertarian when things go my way" crap.
Reply
post #27 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:43pm
The opposition spent 2008 claiming Obama's supporters believed he was some kind of magical messiah and now they get outraged when he isn't magical. Hope they'll figure out we always knew he was just a man, but one who approached problems with intelligence rather than the magical thinking of an idealist or a religious nut. That said, I don't know what the hell can be done as long as that thing is pumping fresh crude into the system by the second. You should just never drill a hole that you can't shut down regardless of the disaster. The stakes are too high and BP clearly didn't take every precaution. The rest is just reaction to an ever-growing problem that I doubt any administration would be adept at handling. And Obama putting on some kind of chair-throwing rage act won't actually solve the problem.
Reply
post #28 of 124
6/14/10 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post
He needs to push green technology and sustainable energy like no tomorrow.
I'm getting blasted with email alerts and petitions (everyone sign!) pushing for clean energy. So his team is doing stuff. I agree it needs to be more public though.
Reply
post #29 of 124
6/14/10 at 6:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
Yeah, this. His reluctance to even back down from possible future drilling is what pisses me off the most about his actions.
Yeah, this sticks in my craw pretty damn bad.

Especially when you read that Rolling Stone piece that states, correct me if I'm wrong, that they're STILL drilling at another site that's FAR deeper.

I mean, given our consumption I totally get keeping the current established rigs going. But I just can't see how anyone's ok with any more being started out there or in any water really.

Unless of course, you're just dandy with catastrophes like this. Because they WILL happen when you drill out in the water. Period.
Reply
post #30 of 124
6/14/10 at 7:01pm
Q&A with Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change and a key advisor on the ongoing Administration-wide response to the BP oil spill.
Reply
post #31 of 124
6/14/10 at 10:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
Yeah, this. His reluctance to even back down from possible future drilling is what pisses me off the most about his actions. And it's clear he's letting BP take the lead to an unacceptable degree.

If he uses the last month as an excuse to say "You guys had your chance, now out of the way," then fine, but I fear he's honestly too beholden to his Reagan-style "keep big government out of it" principles. Ironically enough, given the Republican response.

And it'll be hard for anyone to "forget" about the oil spill for the next few months. This really is a golden opportunity, one which I fear Obama won't be willing to take.
He has to keep supporting off shore drilling because that was a trade off he negotiated with Republicans to get Cap Trade passed

Don't know where you get the idea Obama has "Reagan style keep big government out of it" beliefs. He nationalized General Motors, one of the largest corporations on Earth. Truth is I doubt anyone has the engineering expertise and experience outside of BP

I really really hope tomorrow's address to the Nation will be all about "we need to get Green right Fucking now!"
Reply
post #32 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

I really really hope tomorrow's address to the Nation will be all about "we need to get Green right Fucking now!"
As long as he's not pushing the astoundingly horrible idea known as cap and trade then I concur 100%.
Reply
post #33 of 124
6/14/10 at 11:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Closer View Post
As long as he's not pushing the astoundingly horrible idea known as cap and trade then I concur 100%.
Yeah, there's no need to take a market based approach to price carbon accurately.
Reply
post #34 of 124
6/15/10 at 12:04am
He's talked at great length about his admiration for Reagan. And he's an advocate of the Chicago School.

This is what makes all the "OBAMA IZ SOSHALIST!!!" stuff so stupid.
Reply
post #35 of 124
6/15/10 at 12:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
He's talked at great length about his admiration for Reagan. And he's an advocate of the Chicago School.

This is what makes all the "OBAMA IZ SOSHALIST!!!" stuff so stupid.
Sure he admires Reagan, not least because of his (Reagan's) ability to communicate with and lead the American People.

Obama took over GM, continued the bailout of the largest banks on Earth, and helped pass a huge reform of Health Care that involves direct Government intervention in the market, so I really don't think you can say he is an advocate of the Chicago School at this point. (I happen to think everything but GM was justified)

I think that 1) Obama knows the Government simply can't do anything about the root problem 2) BP is a UK company so he can't nationalize it (and he's getting backlash for talking shit about the company from the Brits) 3) he's doing what he can, but taking too long to do it.
Reply
post #36 of 124
6/15/10 at 2:36am
A president took actions that differed from his stated principles?!? Unheard of!

Bush was castigated (way too late) for being inconsistent on his principles too, that doesn't mean he didn't play the "big government baaaaad" card a lot as well. Obama's not likely to squawk at length about the evils of big government--he doesn't have to, he's not a Republican--but that doesn't mean he doesn't hold views in that direction. And he can nationalize GM one day and then let corporations walk all over him the next--it's not like he hasn't argued for thoughtful action as opposed to knee-jerk responses in the past. It's just that in this case I think his thoughtful action is wrong.
Reply
post #37 of 124
6/15/10 at 2:51am
Where's General Honore when you need him?
Reply
post #38 of 124
6/15/10 at 3:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeypants View Post
Yeah, this sticks in my craw pretty damn bad.

Especially when you read that Rolling Stone piece that states, correct me if I'm wrong, that they're STILL drilling at another site that's FAR deeper.

I mean, given our consumption I totally get keeping the current established rigs going. But I just can't see how anyone's ok with any more being started out there or in any water really.

Unless of course, you're just dandy with catastrophes like this. Because they WILL happen when you drill out in the water. Period.
The thing is, is at this point we still need oil. Even if and when we start going green as a country there is going to be a transition, can't just stop it cold turkey.

Accidents happen, and when they happen they are terrible. But this does not mean we need to stop drilling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post
Where's General Honore when you need him?
Hell, where is anyone in charge really.
Reply
post #39 of 124
6/15/10 at 10:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoonBaseNick View Post
Accidents happen, and when they happen they are terrible. But this does not mean we need to stop drilling.
Well, like I said, for some these accidents are an acceptable casualty. For me they're not.
Reply
post #40 of 124
6/15/10 at 3:30pm
The thing is, we can stop drilling. We can stop extracting oil. Of course this is going to have a major impact on our civilization, but it's going to have an even bigger impact when we run out of oil down the road. As annoying as energy rationing and altering our spending and travelling habits would be at this point, we could probably still hang on to some vestige of our lifestyle. That's not going to happen if we're still using oil in three decades and suddenly there's none to be found.

Ideally the increasing scarcity of oil would raise prices and cause these changes to happen organically, but it seems like people don't have the focus for this anymore. People start buying SUVs again every time the price of oil drops. I have a friend who'd been working on technology related to electric cars, he said the funding dried up as soon as we got over that mini-oil crisis from a while back. It's stupid--we need to grow longer attention spans. I'd rather we bank hard to the left now than go off the road.
Reply
post #41 of 124
6/15/10 at 3:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
I'd rather we bank hard to the left now than go off the road.
Just as long as we don't roll the car over, igniting the gas tank, and turning us all into gibbering mannikins of flame.

It's better to have a careful pull back into sanity than an abrupt sharp movement of the wheel in any direction.

Do people really think just throwing money at random will make our oil dependence disappear? If we actually had some govermental force that sought out technologies to support rather than the pork barrel system we have now, I might believe it.

We need a Manhattan Project for this kind of thing. And even then, will we be able to create the infrastructure required in the time allotted?
Reply
post #42 of 124
6/15/10 at 4:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
Just as long as we don't roll the car over, igniting the gas tank, and turning us all into gibbering mannikins of flame.

It's better to have a careful pull back into sanity than an abrupt sharp movement of the wheel in any direction.

Do people really think just throwing money at random will make our oil dependence disappear? If we actually had some govermental force that sought out technologies to support rather than the pork barrel system we have now, I might believe it.

We need a Manhattan Project for this kind of thing. And even then, will we be able to create the infrastructure required in the time allotted?
That's sort of my point. There may not be time for slow, adaptive responses. It may come down to either a big shakeup now, or a catastrophic one later. So of course people are opting for "later".
Reply
post #43 of 124
6/15/10 at 5:09pm

Best Anti-BP Art

From HuffPo

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...60.html#s99400
Reply
post #44 of 124
6/15/10 at 11:36pm
The address was abysmal. Almost everyone, pundits and "the general public" are hating on it. Hell, even Olbermann, Matthews and Fineman destroyed it in their commentaries. And if he thinks he will ever get another vote from the bayou states he's insane. They are livid at his decision to focus on long-term energy changes rather than the current spill. I'm not saying that isn't the right thing to say and absolutely where we need to go, but come on man.

Weak, weak, weak. Obama needs to thank God he has personality/charisma because it is the ONLY thing keeping him above the teens in approval ratings. What a disappointment.
Reply
post #45 of 124
6/15/10 at 11:57pm
I didn't think the speech was bad like all the pundits are saying, but it was also frustratingly more of the same. This would have been the right time to seize the moment.
Reply
post #46 of 124
6/16/10 at 12:22am
He spent most of it explaining what we are going to do about the future, which is nice and all, but we need action now. He can dream all he wants, but the reality train is coming through the station.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...e_command.html
Reply
post #47 of 124
6/16/10 at 12:32am
Yes a real disappointment, no doubt.

But, he did spend most of the speech talking about the spill and what is being down/will be done to re-mediate it, plus try and prevent it from happening again.

Right after the speech NPR interviewed some Shrew from Louisiana screaming like some weird dead hag about how Obama 'has decided to just cut some Americans (her people) loose" by stopping offshore drilling.

Because I guess all the people who made a living on Tourism, fishing, restaurants, hunting etc etc don't count in this crone's mind...and I guess people in the Offshore Oil Drilling business are genetically programed to do that and nothing else.

Back to the speech: way too little, way too late.

And that touch of self righteous arrogance when he said "I'm ordering BP to start a fund" line really made me cringe. We know he negotiated that agreement with BP: he did not and cannot order BP to do anything.

I guess I'll have to console myself by imagining the comedy of a McCain/Palin response to this fiasco
Reply
post #48 of 124
6/16/10 at 1:01am
HEh the Economist online has some good commentary:

And a link to an Obama "Ass kicking" video
Reply
post #49 of 124
6/16/10 at 1:20am
I find it incredibly depressing that there is no savior party when it comes to the corporate bank takeover of Washington D.C. its simply the same monetary policy decade after decade.

See you when inflation hits.
Reply
post #50 of 124
6/16/10 at 7:11am
Deflation's harder to tame than Inflation.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › President Obama to address the nation on the BP Oil Spill