Skip to main content

Joan Walsh: Peggy Noonan says his presidency is doomed. Even Democrats want him to
be more "emotional."
This is getting silly

Please continue after fold...

There is this:

Constructive Criticism
Part of Speech: Noun
Definition: Criticism or advice that is useful and intended to help or improve something, often with an offer of possible solutions

and then there is this:

Criticism
Part of Speech: Noun
Definition: the act of passing severe judgment; censure; faultfinding.

There is just one word difference between the two---but it makes all the difference. At times, there are room for both, this is not one of those times.

I understand the anger. I get the frustration. When there is a irking problem...people just want two things.

1.) Answers
2.) The Problem Solved

Right now we are getting neither of them. People are losing their livelihoods and they are screaming for action. We, too, need to be screaming for action---but at the right people.

This is NOT President Obama's fault.

This IS BP's and 100% BP's fault.

Let's not forget that.

The Right-Wing has come out in full-force attacking the President from every angle on this story, That is their job. It is expected.
There is Sludge Drudge Report, FAUX NEWS, Redstate, The National Review and Sarah Palin's Twitter Account which seem to be holding up their part of the bargain.

Our job is to deflect that B.S. trash with the truth and facts.

These are the facts:

White House immediately dispatched officials, Coast Guard to work on response

April 20: Oil rig explosion. An April 21 ABCNews.com article reported, "An overnight explosion in the Gulf of Mexico rocked the Deepwater Horizon oil rig off the Louisiana coast, sending spectacular bursts of flame into the sky. The fires were still raging today."

April 21: Deputy Secretary of Interior, Coast Guard dispatched to region. An April 22 White House statement noted that following a briefing with President Obama, Department of Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, Admiral Thad Allen, United States Coast Guard Commandant, Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe, and FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate, "Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes was dispatched to the region yesterday to assist with coordination and response." The Coast Guard announced that four units were responding to the fire, with addition units en route.

   * Search and rescue efforts begin for 11 missing. An initial focus of the response was the search for 11 missing crewmembers. The search was called off April 23.

   * CNN.com: "The U.S. Coast Guard launched a major search effort." An April 22 CNN.com article reported:

   The U.S. Coast Guard launched a major search effort Wednesday for 11 people missing after a "catastrophic" explosion aboard an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico engulfed the drilling platform in flames.

   Another 17 people were injured -- three critically -- in the blast aboard the Deepwater Horizon, which occurred about 10 p.m. Tuesday. The rig was about 52 miles southeast of Venice, Louisiana, said Coast Guard Senior Chief Petty Officer Mike O'Berry. As of late afternoon Wednesday as many as six firefighting vessels were working to contain the massive fire caused by the explosion.

   

"It obviously was a catastrophic event," O'Berry said.

   *  BP confirms U.S. Coast Guard was "leading the emergency response" In an April 21 press release, BP stated they were "working closely with Transocean and the U.S. Coast Guard, which is leading the emergency response, and had been offering its help - including logistical support." A separate April 21 press release from drilling contractor Transocean also stated: "Transocean's Emergency and Family Response Teams are working with the U.S. Coast Guard and lease operator BP Exploration & Production, Inc. to care for all rig personnel and search for missing rig personnel."

April 23: Coast Guard "focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water." On April 23, the Coast Guard stated:

   The Department of the Interior, MMS, and the Coast Guard continue to support the efforts of the responsible parties to secure all potential sources of pollution. Both federal agencies have technical teams in place overseeing the proposals by BP and Transocean to completely secure the well.  Until that has occurred and all parties are confident the risk of additional spill is removed, a high readiness posture to respond will remain in place.

   Although the oil appears to have stopped flowing from the well head, Coast Guard, BP, Transocean, and MMS remain focused on mitigating the impact of the product currently in the water and preparing for a worst-case scenario in the event the seal does not hold.  Visual feed from deployed remotely operated vehicles with sonar capability is continually monitored in an effort to look for any crude oil which still has the potential to emanate from the subsurface well.

   "From what we have observed yesterday and through the night, we are not seeing any signs of release of crude in the subsurface area.  However we remain in a 'ready to respond' mode and are working in a collaborative effort with BP, the responsible party, to prepare for a worst-case scenario," Landry stated early Friday morning.

Axelrod: "We had the Coast Guard on the scene almost immediately" and "the deputy secretary of the Interior was on the ground the next day." White House advisor David Axelrod discussed the administration's response to the oil spill during an appearance on the April 30 edition of ABC's News' Good Morning America. He stated:

   

DAVID AXELROD: This is always the case in Washington, that whenever something like this happens, the political speculation sets in. But the truth of the matter is that we had the Coast Guard on the scene almost immediately after this accident, the deputy secretary of the Interior was on the ground the next day, and we've been coordinating closely with the local authorities and with the responsible party, BP, down there to deal with this from the very beginning. I'm not concerned about that. What I'm concerned about is that we do every single thing we can to remediate this problem, to stop the flow -- and that's what's going on.

http://mediamatters.org/...

But when I look at some on the Left for some defenses against the right-wing smear merchants it seems, instead, we have joined the Liberal mainstream media with their "Obama's Katrina" chants.

I get that what we are looking for right now, is just for the President to call a Press Confrence---step out say:
FUCK YOU BP
and leave.

It will feel good. But It will not accomplish anything and that is just not the kind of leader he is. That would be asking him to act like something he is not. I don't recall the Right begging Dick Cheney to visit the local Petting Zoo and show his soft side.

Joan Walsh writes a "must-read" article on the Right AND Left are blaming the wrong person, President Obama.

I've been struggling to understand the rage at President Obama about his handling of the British Petroleum disaster in the Gulf. I just haven't felt it. I don't see what more he can do, or could have done, to stop the continued oil leak or clean up the spill. So the anger, on right and left, seems strictly political, designed to benefit either one party — Republicans — or one particular point of view. From the left, it's that Obama is too cozy with corporate interests. And from Democrats in the region, like James Carville or Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, it's that the president hasn't made this his highest priority in the last 39 days. If I lived there, I might well share that feeling. That doesn't mean it's justified.

From cable television, 24/7, we're told that even if there's nothing more Obama and his administration could do to stop the leak and contain the damage, he's at fault because he's just not feeling our pain. On MSNBC Friday morning I watched former Rep. David Bonior, last seen peddling John Edwards to Democrats, complain about Obama's cool. "He's got to get emotional," the Democrat (who was there to balance the anti-Obama ranting of Pat Buchanan) insisted.

So Obama traveled to the Gulf today, to examine damaged beaches and wetlands, reassure the region, and emote a little. "I’m here to tell you that you’re not alone," the president told Gulf residents. "You will not be abandoned. You will not be left behind."

...

The criticism from the right isn't surprising, and it isn't particularly hard to refute. The loopy Peggy Noonan wrote one of her loopiest columns of all time today, predicting that the oil spill will mark the end of Obama's presidency. But she loses her train of thought almost immediately. Americans aren't angriest about the oil spill, but about government spending and the government "gushing dollars," a tone-deaf metaphor while the Deepwater Horizon is still gushing oil. Noonan never really tells us exactly how the spill dooms Obama's presidency; she's hoping we'll be too caught up in her gauzy, fact-free prose to ask.

....

The complaints from the left are a little harder to refute, but even there I see a frenzy to lay blame I don't entirely understand. Obama compromised his ability to stay untainted by the oil spill when he flip-flopped and endorsed opening up new areas to offshore oil drilling. Now he's not merely cleaning up the mess of the oil-friendly Bush-Cheney administration, but a mess that's a byproduct of drilling policies he supports.
It's also inaccurate to blame the corruption of the Minerals Management Administration on Bush-Cheney appointees; Elizabeth Birnbaum, the leader who walked the plank Thursday, was appointed by his administration 11 months ago, and the corruption of the agency has been well-known for years. There's no evidence the Obama White House acted with any urgency to clean it up.

....

The real problem, for left, right and the media, is that it's easier to blame the White House and to criticize Obama's demeanor than to report on BP's role in the mess — the corner-cutting on safety in the lead-up to the Deepwater Horizon accident, and the company's woeful lack of preparedness for such a disaster. Of course, some media outlets have done great work: CBS's "60 Minutes," which showed that BP and rig-owner Transocean ignored evidence that the blowout preventer was itself blown out, when technicians found chunks of rubber from its sealant in drilling mud; this week, the New York Times' revelation that BP used the riskier of two choices to seal the well before the blast; just today, the Wall Street Journal, on the lack of preparedness by BP and for a crisis of this magnitude. But they're the exception....  

Full Article: http://www.salon.com/...

This is who caused the problem:
 title=

 title=

And this is the man who is doing everything in his capacity to solve the problem:
 title=
and no I'm not talking about Bobby Jindal

Lets not forget that.
And Lets not forget which side we are on.

Happy Memorial Day

===========================================================

Update:

Thank You so much for appreciating and putting my diary on the rec list. This has been a blessed weekend for me. Much Love to my fellow Kossacks. Again, this diary is to promote discussion but not forget who we are and what we stand for.

UPDATE #2:

Joan Walsh further explains her POV on This Week.

Meanwhile, on This Week this morning Salon’s Joan Walsh — an early and enthusiastic supporter of Obama, herself, who was less than thrilled with the president’s abandonment of the public option during the HCR debates — suggested the nation should stop looking for a daddy.

   

We don’t need a president, apparently we need a daddy. There’s this great call for a daddy, especially among Liberals and I find it ridiculous. You’ve got Maureen Dowd today calling him Spock again, she loves calling him that; Arianna Huffington is calling him ‘nowhere man’ because he’s daring to see a concert honoring Paul McCartney, and I think it’s really it’s a stand-in for a sense of helplessness when we sit here...and there really was a pattern of negligence and there really was warning signs on that rig in the weeks and certainly months perhaps and that’s what we need to get to the bottom of, and I don’t care if he emotes, I don’t need a daddy, I had one, he was great.

She later noted Obama was not Jesus either.

http://www.mediaite.com/...

UPDATED X3:

Looks like I am getting alotta heat for this diary. Mostly because of my word choices (i.e. Left Camp, side). Well I won't be changing anything else to the diary. I stand by what I say. There is a Left vs. Right mentality in this nation---and if you need a wake-up call look up some Tea Party Rallies and read up on Redstate. We can have discussions on our positions but we are still on the same side. I appreciate the KOS community and I appreciate these conversations even more.

Well I have the SAT to study for.
Good Night.

Originally posted to YoungChicagoDemocrat on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:34 PM PDT.

Poll

Can we all take a Chill Pill?

63%76 votes
36%44 votes

| 120 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Um, I hope Bobby Jindall is refusing federal aid (19+ / 0-)

    I  mean, we need to stop spending...right?

    "Don't knock football...it's just like chess but without the dice" - john07801

    by voracious on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:38:50 PM PDT

  •  I am furious (21+ / 4-)

    at the voices here that claim they speak for "left".  The voices that jab and poke at the President at this moment.  

    Well, I'm telling you.  You aren't the left.  You're a bunch of babies.  You have no concept of the grativity of this situation and you have no idea how much damage you are doing.  You speak without reason.  You react to your emotions and smear your feces all over this website.  

    •  Smear your feces? Really? (20+ / 0-)

      I have plenty of idea of the gravity of this situation.  I think there's a tragedy of epic proportions underway.  And the Obama Administration is not an innocent bystander to all that.

      You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

      by Land of Enchantment on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:01:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, really? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Christin, pattym922, alba, Socratic Method

        Then you aren't either.  If you're blaming Obama then you can blame yourself, too and I don't mean for voting for him, either.

        Do you drive a car?  If not, goody for you.  If so, STFU.

        •  read your posts here, Lily. (8+ / 0-)

          I'd say you need to take your own advice.

          "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." -Nancy Pelosi, 6/29/07.

          by nailbender on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:43:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  You're well on your way... (14+ / 0-)

          ... to HR country.  Smearing feces?  STFU?

          The problem is that Obama Administration has been too much of a bystander on this one.  Not just since the spill, but since they came into office.  When you're the most powerful man in the world (or so they say), then you can't be an innocent bystander.

          Carbon's a huge problem requiring serious action.  My carbon footprint's way lower than most folks.  It doesn't have to be zero to express policy positions.  You're veering way into ad hominem here.

          I'm talking issues and actions, and your reply is to cast aspersions on me.  Not helpful, and not useful.

          Obama said that offshore drilling was safe.  There were no safety problems with it.  I don't think he was lying; I think he believed it.  But he was wrong.  Or would you like to try and argue that he was right?

          Without acknowledging what's been done wrong, the likelihood of setting it right is rather severely reduced.  (That's the first step for 12-step programs, and it's not unreasonable to apply that principle to "carbon addiction" - even if not perfect.)

          I've been arguing, for years here (and elsewhere, too), the need for serious action on carbon and climate.  It's the central issue I organize my thinking around.  I have every right to do so, and you're wrong to tell me to STFU.  Dead wrong.

          You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

          by Land of Enchantment on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:15:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think you know what the left represents. (16+ / 0-)

      THIS Administration intervened on behalf of BP to get this well bored in the first place. THIS Administration continued Bush's legacy of feeble regulation of exploitative energy concerns resulting in the myriad environmental lapses which caused the blow out. THIS Administration has done virtually everything that was requested of them, including lending them the friggin Coast Guard to prevent early pictures of the oil coming ashore and allowing them to use a substance banned in Europe as being too toxic. Looks like Europe is going to be getting it anyway, in spite of their ban.

      The "left" did not vote for Palin, they are not going to sit down and shut up when the guy they were coopted into voting for emulates her. If you want to take on the appelation of the "left", it might be an idea to first find out what it stands for.

      A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

      by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:21:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Do you own a car? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jalenth, Tortmaster

        If not, goody for you.  If you do, get off your sanctimonious soapbox.

        We drive cars.  We need oil.  Cheaper if drilled here.  Corrupt, bribed inspectors, oil companies that try to "get over" whenever they can, lazy, irresponsible employees - human error.

        Your post sounds like a FOX NEWs RANT.  Get outta here.

        •  Yes, I do own a car. (10+ / 0-)

          I own a seventeen year old truck. I have been waiting for an affordable alternative for most of my life. The moral to the story here is change we can believe in will not be forthcoming until we can get someone who actually, you know, wants change in office more than just to vary the talking points. So, your first point is a failure.

          You said:

          We drive cars.  We need oil.  Cheaper if drilled here.

          And then:

          Your post sounds like a FOX NEWs RANT.

          Projection is not attractive. I can best wrap this up by quoting you:

          Get outta here.

          At least until you make the effort to try and have a substantive conversation. You are doing Beck proud; I understand he believes Progresives to be a cancer as well.

          A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

          by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:54:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  You will have to provide links for those "facts." (0+ / 0-)
    •  HR'd for calling half this site (6+ / 0-)

      shit smearing babies.

      How does that not qualify for an HR, I wonder?

      "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." -Nancy Pelosi, 6/29/07.

      by nailbender on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:41:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would have joined you (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cdreid

        but I lost my HR privilege.

        It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. --H.L. Mencken

        by denise b on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:51:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Where do you get ... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Christin, YucatanMan, alba

        ... "half this site" from this, nailbender:

        the voices here that claim they speak for "left".  The voices that jab and poke at the President at this moment.  

        Well, I'm telling you.  You aren't the left.  You're a bunch of babies.  You have no concept of the grativity of this situation and you have no idea how much damage you are doing.  You speak without reason.  You react to your emotions and smear your feces all over this website.

         

        Not only are you not being truthful, you are also exaggerating the number of people who make it their daily mission to attack President Obama.  Was that intentional?  I know that some who attack the President would love to say they make up half the site, but that is silly.  

        So, for that reason, your hiderate is based on a misrepresentation.  In that case, why is your hiderate not, then, an abuse of the hr system?  

        "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

        by Tortmaster on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:01:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I see no one "attacking Obama" here, (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cdreid, musing85, saildude, JesseCW, wabird

          much less making it their "daily mission". The last time Obama was here to be "attacked" was during the Primaries when he was asking for money and votes. I don't expect to hear from him for at least another eighteen months or so, and then only dependent upon the polling. I see a lot of people pointing out that he is a tool, but that is more of a characteristic than an insult.

          If Nailbender overestimated the numbers of people on this site who are not groupies, you have also misrepresented what Obama's critics are guilty of. Seems a wash not much worth the effort of making.

          A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

          by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:11:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Why should you worry about ... (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kefauver, begone, alba, a night owl, JoanMar

            ... my posting about others who make it their "daily" mission to attack President Obama, nippersdad?  

            You appear to want Obama to win his next election ... and I don't particularly care whether he does or not. I won't vote for a Republican, good or bad. I hope all of your wishes come true, insofar as mine most certainly will not.

            Just trying to be nice.

            ...

            by nippersdad on Wed May 05, 2010 at 01:25:20 PM CDT

            I remember when Obama was said to be ... pro choice and pro civil liberties. Be careful what you predict.

            A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

            by nippersdad on Thu May 06, 2010 at 12:37:18 PM CDT

            It is becoming increasingly difficult ... to make the case that the Obama Administration is not fascist when virtually everything they do with regard to pushing back on Bush's overreach only serves to compound their precedents.

            Sorry, not in the media nor am I an ... expert, self appointed or otherwise. I perceive him [nippersdad referring to President Obama] to be a Republican. I do not vote for Republicans.

            See how that works? If I am not alone within my demographic, and Obama only won with a seven percent margin during a wave election you can see how the odds start to stack up against him. Do the math.

            by nippersdad on Sun May 09, 2010 at 09:55:31 PM CDT

            by nippersdad on Mon May 10, 2010 at 09:15:29 AM CDT

            He is the Executive, not everything ... he does falls within the purview of Congress. Had you ever had a civics lesson you might know that. This is just an excuse and cannot be compared to, say, Bush and Obama's rejection of slected parts of the Geneva Conventions or Habeus Corpus. There is a difference, y'know....

            by nippersdad on Wed May 12, 2010 at 05:48:33 PM CDT

            I think this is very apt: ... "If he knew what was happening MLK--who Obama so blithely appropriates--would climb out of his grave and vomit on the White House lawn."

            At this point, ironically, it seems like Obama is the very picture of the things that MLK sought to change in our society.

            by nippersdad on Thu May 13, 2010 at 10:34:23 AM CDT

            What they ran from was the concept that the ... Executive was given the power to invade anyone he chose whenever he chose without oversight. The Iraq AUMF was really just and extension, a confirmation of the first one.

            Obama ran on escalation, but he didn't have the burden to overcome of allowing fiasco's like Afghanistan and Iraq in the first place. The anti-war crowd (like myself) voted for him in spite of his campaign platform on the subject hoping he was just playing to the crowd.

            We were wrong.

            by nippersdad on Fri May 14, 2010 at 11:33:25 PM CDT

            The answer to the problem ... was discussed on day one; implode the well using conventional explosives. The reason that they have not done this is because BP would lose its' investment in the drill site.

            I'm with you. Had Obama stopped all of BP's operations in the Gulf pending a strict review of their environmental compliance, or even threatened to, we would not be having this converstion right now.

            by nippersdad on Fri May 21, 2010 at 12:55:09 PM CDT

            They have a lease, Obama has destroyers. ... Seems to me that there are easier, faster ways to prevent them from pumping toxic cocktails into the Caribbean than taking them to court.

            by nippersdad on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:34:54 PM CDT

            Wasn't the ban against ... deep water drilling of the type we are now seeing a direct consequence of the Obama Administration's intervention in the courts on behalf of the likes of BP?

            It could have happened to Clinton, Bush - anyone.

            I don't think Clinton or Bush could have been President for such a problem if the practice had specifically been banned at the time.

            by nippersdad on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:30:56 AM CDT

            You've missed a couple of days.  (Of course, in your defense, on the days you didn't make comments criticizing President Obama, it appears that you didn't make any comments at all on dkos.).  

            "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

            by Tortmaster on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:54:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You Just Contaminated this Diary (0+ / 0-)

              I had to go back and remove every mark I left here -- because the Diary is now foul and I don't want the stench on me.

              ::
              The Pluto Chronicles. You want reality? You can't handle reality!

              by Pluto on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:57:25 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Would you care to argue any of the points made? (0+ / 0-)

              It is not mine or anyone else's "mission" to "attack" Obama, but in conversation with others why lie? I stand by all of my comments, do you?

              A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

              by nippersdad on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:04:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  you assume I buy her narrative. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musing85, ganymeade, nippersdad

          I don't, obviously.  Her opinion of who is "attacking Obama" is based on a presumption that criticism is attacking.  It isn't. It's criticism, albeit pointed and angry, to be sure.

          "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you can succeed." -Nancy Pelosi, 6/29/07.

          by nailbender on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:05:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  the left is a pretty big place, (4+ / 0-)

      with all kinds of people.

      "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

      by James Allen on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:50:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I'm furious with idiotic attempts (0+ / 0-)

      like this one to insist that no criticism of the president will be tolerated, no matter how warranted. And to paint anyone who disagrees as evil, deluded, whiny, immature, or what have you.

      You say:

      You have no concept of the grativity [sic] of this situation and you have no idea how much damage you are doing.  You speak without reason.  You react to your emotions and smear your feces all over this website.

      You and yours don't seem to have any better grasp of the "grativity" of the situation, but that doesn't keep you from insisting that the president is responding to it perfectly. As to "speaking without reason," res ipsa loquitur: your own comment betrays you on that point.

      "Smearing feces"? Really? I'll stick with Theodore Roosevelt, thanks:

      To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.

  •  And, you lose me (18+ / 0-)

    But when I look at the Left Camp

    "Left Camp" meaning the massive and broad dumping ground where you lump people who don't agree with you into a pile you don't ever have to seriously address.

    You just pick the most extreme voice, and tar everyone you lump together with that broadbrush label.  

    I worked hard for Obama.
    I sent him money. Gave him my time.

    Until you wake up one day and stop creating this "Left" dumping ground, it's all just vapid substance free 'clap louderism' to me.

    •  I lose you by stating (20+ / 0-)

      that there is a "Left Camp"?

      Maybe if i rephrase to "some of those in the Left"---

      obviously if you aren't one of those falsely attacking the president I am not talking about you

      Although a republican government is slow to move, yet when once in motion, its momentum becomes irresistible. Thomas Jefferson

      by YoungChicagoDemocrat on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:45:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (12+ / 0-)

        because you are using the widest and broadest possible rhetorical brush because you are simply too fucking lazy or you don't care enough to get specific and stay specific when you are talking about specific people.

        •  Well I think that there actually (10+ / 0-)

          is a "Left Camp" and a "Right Camp".

          Don't understand where the anger is coming from.

          We are on the same team.

          Besides that has little to do with the main point of my diary which is we need to re-group and do a better job of writing the real narrative of what is happening re BP's Oil Spill.

          Would it have been better to point out specific diarists or pundits?
          Sure.

          Saying I'm fucking lazy for not doing the research is ridiculous. Maybe you are lazy for not looking around.

          -Keith Olbermann
          -Rachel Maddow
          -SOME Kossacks

          are just a few who have criticized the president.

          Again, this is my diary, if i felt it important to actually point out every real criticism I would have. Obviously I didn't.

          Good Night:)

          Although a republican government is slow to move, yet when once in motion, its momentum becomes irresistible. Thomas Jefferson

          by YoungChicagoDemocrat on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:55:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They're not the only ones from the Democratic (8+ / 0-)

            side who've criticized the White House handling of this.  Mary Matalin's husband is not exactly a Ragin' LIBERAL Cagun, now is he?  Lots of others not in your garbagey "Left Camp" were also unhappy with the WH response.

            Of COURSE the president could not have truly done anything to cap the well, but his administration made a deliberate decision to cede control of the crime scene and the environmentally important decisions on clean-up and dispersants, and keeping objective, neutral scientists away from measuring outflow and undersea impact, etc., etc.

            In other words, they did not aggressively manage the unfolding catastrophe until recently, AFTER they were criticized.  You conservative Dems can make up all the excuses you want, but although there is some that was good done, and some out of the admin's hands, there was other disaster management that was left to BP for political reasons.  It was not good for Obama's public image as a leader.

            People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -- "V for Vendetta"

            by Vtdblue on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:24:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I heard Carville say something interesting the (7+ / 0-)

              other night. He said the people of LA are sick of being treated like this. If this leak was off the coast of S.F. or MA. the government would have been there long ago to mitigate the damage. I thought, perhaps there is a reason why this might be true. With the exception of Scott Brown look at the people who are elected to represent the people of S.F. and MA, they elect representatives who care about perserving the environment and they don't allow these oil companies to get their way and drill off the coast of S.F. or MA. I am not saying this is deserved by the people of LA, but look at your representatives and your Senators, and your Governor, perhaps that might have something to do with the suffering these people have had to endure. It matters who you vote for, issues matter.

              •  A fair point, though weeks ago it was clear to (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jonnie rae

                most of us (you included, I'm sure) that this was a national emergency of colossal proportions.  Of course, until it becomes that more visibly (in FL, GA, SC, NC and VA), the political locus will stay on the other Republican voting states of the Gulf.  

                Part of the issue also is that the Gulf populations are traditionally very sympathetic to oil drilling, since many make money off of it.  So it's a big ol' case of cognitive dissonance, as well.

                People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -- "V for Vendetta"

                by Vtdblue on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:53:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The same was true with Katrina (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Vtdblue

                  although Bush was clueless to what was really happening. Brownie and Chertoff screwed up as well, but it was up to the local government, the Mayor  the Governor and the Senators to make sure a Hurricaine didn't do the damage Katrina did. I am no Jeb Bush fan at all, but Florida too has hurricaines and he seemed to manage them much better. As far as Carville's claim that if this was S.F. things would be different, he is right, we have two Senators in California, both from the Bay area as well as the Speaker of the House from the Bay area, all three of these woman know it is important to protect the environment and not allow drilling off the coast of S.F. The are aware of the damage an oil spill can do to devastate a coastal region of the country. That is one of the reasons the mid-term elections are so important. In California Barbara Boxer is up for re-election, as well a the office of Governor. Senator Boxer has made it clear she will not allow drilling off the coast of CA, not so with her opposition. Also while the candidates for Governor are busy debating how strongly they support Arizona's immigration law, they have not been clear on how they stand about offshore drilling. It has been tossed about to help California out of it's financial crisis. As inept as he might be Arnold has said no to off shore drilling and he  needs to be commeneded for that. If a conservative Republican is in charge, I don't know if they will not sell us out to the oil companies for a few pieces of silver. That is what has happened in LA and the people are now suffering for their greed.

              •  Yup - and those same F'g LA politicians who (5+ / 0-)

                enabled the destruction of the environment by the oil industry for decades are on TV simultaneously complaining about Obama's inability to cap the well and do the clean up yesterday and his 6-month moratorium on exploratory drilling. The latter will destroy their economy, they say. As if another disaster will never happen again just because they are rolling in campaign funds from the petrol criminals. And we wonder why our political system is as screwed up as it is . . .  

                •  The hypocrisy is deep and wide all around (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  alba

                  And no more so than in Bobby Jindal's case.  But he'll find some way to spin it shamelessly in ways that will shoe-horn the reality into his contradictory political stances, I have little doubt.

                  People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -- "V for Vendetta"

                  by Vtdblue on Mon May 31, 2010 at 09:23:50 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Don't forget Chris Matthews. (0+ / 0-)

            Ed Shultz, Joe Scarborough, all of MSNBC really.

          •  Your analysis fails (0+ / 0-)

            This is not a matter of left versus right. This is a matter of people who will not see a single unpleasant thing said about this president (a group you didn't even bother to identify in your facile "analysis" of the situation) versus people who don't think that everything the president does is automatically perfect, just because the president does it.

            There is plenty to criticize in the Obama administration's response to and handling of this disaster. Has some of the criticism been overblown? Hell, yes. And so has some of the praise mistakenly heaped on him in an attempt by the Glee Club to counter what they feel is illegitimate criticism. (Which, in their minds, amounts to anything critical, no matter how mild.)

            It's the president's job to take the heat for what goes wrong on his/her watch. That's why s/he also gets to take credit for the good stuff. And as for the idea, beloved of many on this site, that you either support the president or you're a member of the "loony left" and hate him, I'll stick with Theodore Roosevelt:

            To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.

    •  I proudly support Obama (11+ / 0-)

      by the way.

      It's exactly that reason that I wholeheartedly reject 'clap louderism'. I believe in my President.

      Not all criticism of him is simply catagorizable as a 'tear down'.

      I also believe he isn't made out of sugar and can't take the heat. Or I wouldn't have voted for him.

      I only wish people who claimed to be his biggest boosters had more faith in his ability to hear many voices, including the harshest voices of legitimate dissent, weren't so damned quick to adopt the 'you are either with us or against us rhetoric of the Bushies.

      •  Dear Lefty: (10+ / 0-)

        It's been eighteen months
        Obama has set his administration - the die is cast, thus:

        1.  Soft on AIG
        1.  Soft on Big Wall Street Banks
        1.  "Credit Card Reform"  mainly cosmetic
        1.  Ken Salazar did NOTHING to reform MM in Interior, and

                  Obama does not fire him

        1.  Obama's influence in Congress seems nil !!  Big big problem.
        1.  He still believes in bi-partisanship -- he's WAAAY behind

                  the curve on this and it's counterproductive

        1.  He lacks the showman's touch that a president needs;

                  he seems to lack imagination.  The BP debacle is a good
                  example of it.

        1.   He thinks Republicans and Oil Executives are real people and

                   to be trusted.  They are not.

        And so on .......  I am VERY disappointed; how can I not be?

        •  mrmyster, please ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Christin, Socratic Method

          ... tell me who would have done a better job with all the problems that the incoming administration faced.  I am already smiling, waiting for your response.  Thanks in advance.  

          "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

          by Tortmaster on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:04:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah, hypothetical land. (6+ / 0-)

            I'm going with He-Man. What a stupid question.

            The better question would be, "What can this president do to better deal with the problems that this country faces?"

            And by golly, folks here are answering that question already without being asked. How kind of them!

            It really comes down to this: You either like what's happening or you don't. Great, you like what you see going on, we get it. Others don't. You think they're stupid, we get it.

            Stupid would be your continual insistence that the people with a differing opinion shut up. It's not going to happen, no matter how hard you clap.

            •  LOL!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

              That's exactly the response I expected!  Sorry, I have to get up off the floor and explain something to you:  If you can't name ONE PERSON IN THE WORLD who could have done a better job, then you have no basis for criticism.  

              P.S.  (aside) Thank the Spaghetti Monster in the Sky we have President Obama!

              "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

              by Tortmaster on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:59:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I see. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo

                Your logic is flawless. Good night.

              •  Um (3+ / 3-)
                Recommended by:
                ganymeade, corvo, JesseCW
                Hidden by:
                raptavio, jonnie rae, Tortmaster

                Here you go fanboy:

                Howard Dean
                John Kerry
                Hillary Clinton
                Alan Grayson
                Bernie Sanders
                Al Gore
                Barbara Boxer

                I could go on for at least another 30 names off the top of my head.

                Your uncontrollable need to blindly worship an authority figure is saddening.

                The Republicans want to give your Social Security to Wall Street

                by cdreid on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:32:31 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Hr'd for the ... (1+ / 2-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jonnie rae
                  Hidden by:
                  ganymeade, raptavio

                  ... ad hom, but I did appreciate the laugh!  Thanks.  

                  "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

                  by Tortmaster on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:37:01 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Uprated for serious HR abuse by Ganymeade (5+ / 0-)

                    Ganymeade UPRATES a  personal attack and then HR's this clearly not-HR'able comment.

                    Reported.

                    •  Disagree. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Tortmaster

                      Tortmaster committed HR abuse by HRing a comment directed at him, which is against the rules.
                      I tossed a donut on his pile which I will remove if he removes the inappropriate HR.

                      We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. -- Jonathan Swift

                      by raptavio on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:42:10 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Agree (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Meteor Blades, Tortmaster, QES

                        But Ganymeade's uprate of a personal attack is abuse of the moderating system.

                      •  I rec'd you raptavio ... (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        raptavio

                        ... because I love your haikus!  I do disagree with you about what constitutes HR abuse in this particular situation.  The applicable FAQ states:

                        Do not troll rate someone you are actively having a fight with. If you are in a heated argument with someone, you should not be judging whether or not what they say is trollworthy. Leave it to others to decide what behavior is or isn't over the line.

                        The key word in this situation is "actively."  I was not in the midst of an argument with the person I troll-rated.  On the contrary, I was having a debate with another poster, and the person I troll-rated jumped out of the blue to call me a name.  Another applicable phrase from the same FAQ is:  

                        If you are in a heated argument with someone....

                        As you can see above, there was no heated argument.  The person just popped out of the blue and called me a name.  Of course, if there is other controlling authority out there -- or if Meteor Blades tells me otherwise -- I will change my understanding of the rule, but I believe that I'm right and will leave my hiderate.  I'm sure you believe you're right and will leave yours as well, but I wanted to explain.  ;)  

                        "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

                        by Tortmaster on Mon May 31, 2010 at 10:43:48 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I've heard that argument before (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Tortmaster

                          and I would say that the same underlying principle applies: If it's inappropriate, it will be hidden by those who are NOT the intended target, who are less biased (in theory).

                          But points for defending your position clearly and dispassionately.

                          We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. -- Jonathan Swift

                          by raptavio on Mon May 31, 2010 at 10:53:55 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  Blatant HR abuse, and the person doing it knows (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  cdreid, musing85, corvo, Situational Lefty

                  it.

                  No one gets to HR in disputes they're actively part of.

                  Alot of junkies would be headed for rehab if they blew a vein this badly. Apparently, oil is better than smack.

                  by JesseCW on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:44:20 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I see, JesseCW, that ... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    fcvaguy

                    ... you not only failed to hiderate the namecaller, but you also recommended the namecalling.  Isn't that hypocritical on your part?  That's one thing you got wrong.  

                    Your second mistake was to get the phrase "in a dispute with" wrong.  I was having a debate with someone else when the commentator I hiderated came out of the blue and called me a name.  I gave them a hiderate.  I wasn't in a dispute with him or her.  "In a dispute with" means an argument that has continued to escalate to namecalling, racism or threats of violence, etc.  You know that, but you just wanted to attack me out of the blue yourself.  Fine, I'll laugh that off as well!  But, I won't add to a threadjacking and won't respond to you any more.  

                    Here's a deal:  I'll remove my HR if you replace it and keep it there.  Agreed?  

                    I would note that of the list of potential Presidents listed, Hillary Clinton is, in my opinion, by far the ablest, most intelligent and best-suited for the job.  Yet, President Obama managed to beat her in the primary even though she had (a) the backing of the establishment, (b) more name recognition, (c) better funding at least at the start, (d) the cachet of being a potential "first" as well, (e) a wide margin in the early polling, (f) a built-in "running mate" who happened to also have been a former President, (g) early "frontrunner" status, (h) a supposed "swing-state" or "general election" advantage, and (i) a "seasoned" and "veteran campaigner" image gap over the future President.  This kind of argument is like saying that Orlando is a better basketball team than the LA Lakers.          

                    "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

                    by Tortmaster on Mon May 31, 2010 at 02:21:38 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Hell no. I'm not going to encourage you to (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      cdreid, musing85, corvo

                      continue to abuse your HR's by negotiating some sort of 'swap' deal.

                      The FAQ is crystal clear on the matter - you don't get to HR people because you don't like what they've said to you.

                      For all that, you know, the rules matter to you.

                      Alot of junkies would be headed for rehab if they blew a vein this badly. Apparently, oil is better than smack.

                      by JesseCW on Mon May 31, 2010 at 03:55:41 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Why are you uprating personal attacks? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    QES

                    This is clearly Uprating Abuse:

                    * [new] Um (2+ / 2-)
                    Recommended by:ganymeade, JesseCW
                    Hidden by:jonnie rae, Tortmaster
                    Here you go fanboy:

                    Reported.

                •  Gore and Clinton are the only names... (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  cdreid, kefauver, lazybum, Tortmaster

                  ...that would have a shot at being effective Presidents.  But I wouldn't trade Obama for either of them.

                  Dkos has lost it's shit.

                  by snout on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:29:41 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Adding HR to the pile (0+ / 0-)

                  but I also HRed Tortmaster for his HR abuse. There is symmetry.

                  We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. -- Jonathan Swift

                  by raptavio on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:43:50 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Agree. I suppose around here I'm (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        snout, jonnie rae, Tortmaster

        considered an apologist because I support the President. That doesn't mean I don't get angry and frustrated with him because he's not doing what I think he should be doing on a particular issue at any given time.  

        One group that causes my eyes to roll backwards are those who offer nothing but criticism. I think their minds are made up against him and have become incapable of seeing the good he's done. Some are rather cagey about it but the message comes through.

        I can't help but dismiss a few others because they're consistently emotional and take his actions or non-actions personally. He makes them cry, they're so disappointed in him, yada yada. Makes for good theatrics but I'm not buying the ticket.

        I know that sounds mean. I truly try to understand others' opinions that differ from mine but it's difficult at times not to respond. My patience is finite.

    •  Thank you, LeftHandedMan... (10+ / 0-)

      Thank you for pointing out the difference between criticizing Obama's actions and "smearing feces".

      One goal of this site is the election of more Democrats.  Obama is not helping that cause when he does not challenge BP.  Everyone knew that the BP estimates were false, but Obama did not challenge them.  He did not address the issue at all.  He did not use the vast military and civilian intelligence apparatus at his disposal to find out what was really going on -- what this foreign company was doing to our American coast.  What is worse, he did not explain in any satisfactory manner why he chose not to do so.

      No one expects him to go down under water and plug the "leak".  No one expects him to do anything but what he can, and to explain clearly what he cannot do and why.  

      (Similarly, he he is going to keep Geithner on as Secretary of The Treasury, please let the American people know why he is doing so.)

      This is going to cost the Democrats in the November election.  I think we have not only a right to criticize -- we have an obligation.

  •  Gen Powell (9+ / 0-)

    Obama has two problems -- and one of them is very surprising, namely he has been uwilling or unable to deliver a coup de theatre to make the American public think he is really doing to make a difference in the Gulf crisis -- such as a large fleet of supertankers entering the Gulf and trolling back and forth sucking up the oil -- as is suggested by the retired Pres. of Shell, Hoffmeister. It's a great
    idea, even if it is just showmanship -- the situation needs that. Americans need a little grip on confidence.
    Two:  Obama needs to wake up to what Gen Powell said today -- that BP does not have the ability to solve the problem.  It is total frustration. Like pushing
    on a rope. Nothing happens.  Go ahead and be angry, but nothing happens.
    So....call in Shell?  Exxon?  Get SOMEBODY in there who can do the job.
    FIRE BP, but of course send them the multi-billion bill for whatever it
    ultimately costs, and in fact, let's just let the US Govt seize BP's American assets to pay for it all and put them out of business here.
    And keep in mind who is BP's largest shareholder/owner: The British Royal Family. How about pinning a tail or two on those donkeys?
    What do you think about that, YoungChiDem?
    OldSantaFeDem
    who is disappointed in Obama, quite much.

    •  oh yes. (7+ / 0-)

      i will ask Gen Powell why he advocated killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqui's with his lies.
      i would ask them if I could the next time he lectures Obama.

      "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

      by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:03:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If BP doesn't have that ability, who DOES? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, jonnie rae, SoCalSal

      Certainly, the federal government itself doesn't have it, since it's not in the business of off-shore drilling.  And since a similar thing has never happened before (and by similar, I mean at anything remotely approaching these depths), I doubt that anybody KNOWS how to do it.  Different people may have different ideas, but one thing is for sure -- none of them has a greater motivation to get this thing stopped as soon as possible than does BP, because the longer it continues, the deeper is the hole in which BP will find itself.

      •  "British" (0+ / 0-)

        BP could hardly be more British; it's largest share owners
        are the UK Royal family.  Do you want them to manage your
        well being, your Gulf coast?
        BP is a classic case of British stumblebumming -- really
        they are; just "muddling through." Leaking all the while.
        Meanwhile the oil is flowing at a deadly rate.
        I recommend Shell or Exxon to take this on.
        It is time to seize BP's North American assets and
        run them out of the Western Hemisphere - forever.
        Another revolution against the incompetent British.
        Yep, I am making a generalization.
        I mean to.

  •  He's digging himself in needlessly (3+ / 0-)

    I have been very critical of the Obama Administration because I find it not much different from W's second term (war escalation, bailouts, insurance-industry dominated "reform," etc), but on the spill issue I think there is unfair criticism.  

    I agre with you; this is BP's disaster, not Obama's.  I don't think we should expect the government to rush in and fix this problem -- it's clear the federal government has no better solutions than BP does and no one with two brain cells thinks BP isn't trying to fix this to the best of their ability since every day that goes by is a deeper disaster for BP. The public pressure is intense on BP and that is pushing them to stop it.  And if they can't stop it, how is the federal government going to stop it?

    But, I think the president dug himself in needlessly at the end of the week when he said he takes responsibility.  Why in the world would he say that?  It's not his problem and it's not his responsibility to come up with the way to stop this.

    •  I have three brain cells and I think that BP (7+ / 0-)

      is doing their best to hide what is going on, and that their goal of minimizing liability is hurting their effort to fix things.

      BP's effort to avoid admitting that clean-up crews are not exposed to toxic fumes is keeping them from providing protective equipment.  Hiding is more important than preventing lung injuries.

      Yes, it is true that "every day that goes by is a deeper disaster for BP. The public pressure is intense on BP and that is pushing them to stop it."

      However, BP is much more invested in minimizing their liability than in fixing things.  Why else would they deceive everyone on the size of the problem?  That, in itself, interferes with getting it fixed.

      However, the government is supposed to have goals other than limiting liability.  What is the administration's excuse for not challenging BP to tell the truth?  I do not find "problems in North Korea" to be an acceptable answer.

      •  Do you really think the government could do it (0+ / 0-)

        better?  If it can, then by all means as commander in chief he should seize the area and "fix it."  

        •  So the answer is for the government to take (0+ / 0-)

          whatever BP decides to do or else fix it themselves.  If BP wants to use toxic dispersants, do we have to let them or else "fix it" ourselves?  If BP wants to hide information, do we have to let them or else "fix it ourselves"? What if BP wants to throw cyanide in the ocean?  Do we have to let them or else fix it ourselves?  At some point the government has to exercise oversight.  

          •  Which government? (0+ / 0-)

            You are taking examples of purposeful pollution that are not relevant to my points.  But, let's play with your scenarios and assume BP is in international waters...1) What right does the U.S. have to step in? and 2) Why is it the U.S.'s responsibility if the activity occurs in internaltional waters?  If the activity occurs in U.S. territorial waters (12 miles from coastline), then the U.S. has the right to regulate.  If it occurs 50 miles, 100 miles, 1000 miles from the coastline, what jurisdiction does the U.S. have?  And if you claim that it is merely the moral thing to do, for the U.S. to send its gunboats 500 miles off the shore to stop a pollutant, why the U.S. and why not Canada, Mexico, Brazil or the UK?

            •  We have, supposedly, whatever rights made the (0+ / 0-)

              US the one to issue drilling permits.  Just because BP is running the operation, that does not mean that the US does not have the obligation to oversee it to the extent that BP not be allowed to use the most toxic dispersant and that BP not be allowed to lie about the size of the problem.

              I do not understand the gunboats comment -- are you saying that you think that the US will need gunboats to keep BP from using toxic dispersants?

              As for the last point, involving Canada, Mexico and Brazil, remember that we were the ones who issued the drilling permit.

    •  I don't want to live in a country where..... (4+ / 0-)

      ...the government doesn't rush in and try and solve this "problem", the word "problem" here referring to the complete destruction of a way of life, the source of 1/2 of our seafood that is not from fucking China, and a great American city that was just getting back up off its knees.

      British Petroleum: I think that means it's foreign oil.

      by Bensdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:47:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I met Obama . Talked to him and got a good feel (29+ / 0-)

    of his personality. This wild angry man that they keep demanding that he be does not exist and will never come out. That's not Obama . That's never been Obama and it's not gonna start being Obama. They will continue to be mad at him.

    "No! You can't drive! We don't want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out." ~ President Barack Obama to GOP

    by WeBetterWinThisTime on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:47:23 PM PDT

    •  Straw man. No ones calling for such a thing -- (8+ / 0-)

      just a recognition of the enormity of the unfolding human suffering and a reflection of the overall anger the American public feels about getting shafted by the oil companies -- particularly BP.  

      It's called "leadership," and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was not a "wild angry man" either, recognized that national leadership requires getting worked up about some things at a productive level.  

      People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -- "V for Vendetta"

      by Vtdblue on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:31:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  . (22+ / 0-)

    This is an American moment, Obama just happens to be president for it, unfortunately. It could have happened to Clinton, Bush - anyone. The moment is that a simple ugly truth is being revealed: Corporations are more powerful than the government. We've "known" this for some time, but this makes it very plain. the government is sitting around like fifth-graders while the school burns down. They can't do anything - because they're not in charge.

    Obama doesn't win this by stopping the oil flow alone, he wins it by taking power away from corporations. It's actually an opportunity to fundamentally change this country.

    I wish I could take credit for this..it was posted by another kossack named Little.

    If we could get past the blame game, and get to the structural problem....
    we just might be able to shift the conversation.

    "Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle." -Helen Keller

    by ridemybike on Sun May 30, 2010 at 09:50:41 PM PDT

    •  Fantastic comment! n/t (7+ / 0-)

      "Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

      by TheWesternSun on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:04:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  thank ♥ you for posting Little's (7+ / 0-)

      quote.
      completely and one hundred percent true.

      "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

      by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:05:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i sure do miss you (5+ / 0-)

        :-)

        this whole disaster in the gulf has been upsetting me to no end....and, unfortunately, after 30 years of chipping away at our government...

        we see how that's worked out.

        the banks
        the insurance industry
        the oil industry

        no president has had more on his plate than
        our current one....perhaps since FDR.

        but, if we could all just grow up
        and start addressing the real issue;
        the fact that the instrument of the people wields no power anymore...

        we might be able to help our president
        right the course of our country which is terribly
        off course.

        btw, sweet Christin...when you are ready
        a bicycle awaits you :-)

        "Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle." -Helen Keller

        by ridemybike on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:11:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  which reminds me. (3+ / 0-)

          i posted a comment to that picture you posted. and then my pc hung up on me and it didn't post.
          and i never reposted.

          this is not the time or place, but damn!
          your boyfriend was hohtee! :-)
          listen, you either need to move to Germany or figure something out.
          and to think I speak German and could have grilled him about his intensions.

          i thought this oil spill was horrific on day one.
          it's gotten to the point where it's like this mofo nightmare from hell.
          i can't wrap my head around this nightmare anymore.
          it just keeps getting worse.
          and to me, it was worse on the first day.  
          i mean gushing until august?  can't understand that.
          i have nightmares about what happens in factory farms to animals.
          i honest to god do.
          if i let my mind go there, i crumble.
          i can't even think about what is going on in the gulf.
          i don't read. i don't look . i turn the channel.
          but it's not working anymore.

          but i did piss off my friend on thursday who was wailing about the pelicans as she was eating her damn pork chop.
          i was like "you might want to google what the hell happened to that animal on your kaiser roll".
          i can't hold back anymore. i've had it.

          anyway.
          you need to move to Germany.

          "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

          by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:26:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  damn!! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Christin, soothsayer99

            and to think I speak German and could have grilled him about his intensions.

            I know...I know, this isn't the time or place...
            but I sure missed an opportunity there...

            maybe I'll get lucky and find something in my inbox from you....
            you know
            regarding that vegetarian lunch
            and the bike ride ;-)

            "Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle." -Helen Keller

            by ridemybike on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:55:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  :-) (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              soothsayer99, ridemybike

              well. i said i speak it.
              doesn't mean he would understand it.
              but i can fake it with the best of them.

              yes. it's warm now. :-)
              perfect for a ride.
              i get the feeling you could ride 39843948 miles and then ride another 38948309483098 before taking a break.

              "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

              by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:16:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Wasn't the ban against (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW, Vtdblue

      deep water drilling of the type we are now seeing a direct consequence of the Obama Administration's intervention in the courts on behalf of the likes of BP?

      It could have happened to Clinton, Bush - anyone.

      I don't think Clinton or Bush could have been President for such a problem if the practice had specifically been banned at the time.

      A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

      by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:30:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ah, but there's the rub! Obama will NOT take on (5+ / 0-)

      the corporations, given his predisposition to coddle them and fill his administration with those coming directly from corporate leadership positions.

      You're absolutely correct, as is Little, about the nature of the problem: But you're sadly mistaken if you think this president and his WH are truly interested in taking on the corporate juggernaut.  The "blame game" is about trying to get Obama and Co. to do that very thing you seem to wish for, and unless those in his own Party push hard for it, guaranteed it won't get done.

      People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -- "V for Vendetta"

      by Vtdblue on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:36:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The flaw in your logic. (17+ / 0-)

    Obama Admin approved the drilling permit.  Signed off on the Categorical Exlusion from NEPA review, too.  After the gusher blew, they took BP at face value.

    The thing about saying it's all BP?  It seems, to me, to buy into a corporatist viewpoint.  That anything, and everything, is about the corporations.  They are big, and we are small.  They are big, and the government is impotent in the face of them.

    This thing is not just about what's wrong with BP.  If that's all you see, you're missing the point - that's what I think.  This thing is the inevitable consequence of the Cheney approach: corporations, unfettered, is the way to go.  Saying it's only about BP kinda buys into that, too.  They were allowed to go ahead; the Administration assumed they were on the up and up.  (Based on what, pray tell?)  

    It's also about Obama announcing expanded offshore drilling shortly before this thing blew, asserting that it's safe.  Obviously, he was wrong about that.

    The thing is:  This IS offshore drilling.  These are the cold hard facts of offshore drilling.  That and the more general problem of carbon.  WTF are we waiting for to do something about it?  The US is behind most of the developed countries of the world.  It is foolishness on a epic scale.  Obama may have some secret thoughts we don't know about, but I think that actions matter more.

    We can see the mistakes that contributed to this - and Obama Administration's hands are not clean in this matter.  A huge price is being paid for that.  The important remaining question is whether we, or rather they take the lessons of this to heart, and start making some real effort to do the right thing.  That's why I changed my sig line lately:

    You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

    by Land of Enchantment on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:00:06 PM PDT

    •  Appreciate you looking at my diary (12+ / 0-)

      and you make many, many good points.

      But what I am trying to say is that the Right is writing the narrative that:

      BARACK HUSSIEN OBAMA CAUSED OIL SPILL

      We have to fight back effectively, and this infighting, right now is not helping.

      As for the points you make about Off-Shore Oil Drilling, I sincerely hope the President makes rooted changes, but again it won't be easy---the corporatist have infiltrated how the government is run and have for many, many years.

      Let me end with this comment I seen earlier:

         

      This is an American moment, Obama just happens to be president for it, unfortunately. It could have happened to Clinton, Bush - anyone. The moment is that a simple ugly truth is being revealed: Corporations are more powerful than the government. We've "known" this for some time, but this makes it very plain. the government is sitting around like fifth-graders while the school burns down. They can't do anything - because they're not in charge.

         Obama doesn't win this by stopping the oil flow alone, he wins it by taking power away from corporations. It's actually an opportunity to fundamentally change this country.

      I wish I could take credit for this..it was posted by another kossack named Little.

      Although a republican government is slow to move, yet when once in motion, its momentum becomes irresistible. Thomas Jefferson

      by YoungChicagoDemocrat on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:15:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that comment has been resonating with me (5+ / 0-)

        since the moment I read it.

        spot on, imo.

        "Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle." -Helen Keller

        by ridemybike on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:22:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  IMO, this "infighting," or the lack thereoff, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Liberal Thinking, WisePiper

        will have no impact on how many people think "Barack Obama caused the oil spill".  We should auit trying to use every time the right says something stupid and baseless as an excuse to quit having disagreements and to circle the wagons.

        If we want to win elections this November, we need some help from Obama.  Unfortunately, we do not seem likely to get any unless we complain, and complain a lot!

      •  Stop it (6+ / 0-)

        But what I am trying to say is that the Right is writing the narrative that:

           BARACK HUSSIEN OBAMA CAUSED OIL SPILL

        Nobody, literally nobody is saying that.  

        Let's keep to the facts of the situation.  First nobody is saying that.  Second, nobody in their right mind believes it either.  

        And on the other hand, fair-minded people don't believe this either:

        This is NOT President Obama's fault.

        This IS BP's and 100% BP's fault.

        The cause of the problem is multi-faceted and the problems with the response are multi-faceted.

        There's no black and white analysis of this particular problem.  The blame spills over on to a lot of people.

        •  Obama Administration - regulatory failures (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          YucatanMan, cumberland sibyl

          in regards to BP -

          Obama administration blocked efforts to stop BP oil drilling before explosion
          By Joe Kishore
          10 May 2010

          In 2009, the Obama administration intervened to support the reversal of a court order that would have halted offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Obama’s Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who has long had close ties to the industry, specifically cited BP’s Deepwater Horizon operation as one that should be allowed to go forward, according to a group involved in the court case.

          A Washington DC Appeals Court ruled in April 2009 that the Bush administration’s five-year plan for offshore oil and gas drilling (covering 2007 to 2012) was not based on a proper review of the environmental impact of the drilling. Only days before the ruling, the Obama administration had granted BP a "categorical exclusion," exempting it from an environmental impact study for the Deepwater Horizon project.

          The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry trade group, intervened to reverse the court order, and was backed by the administration.

          Kierán Suckling, executive director and founder the Center for Biological Diversity, which was involved in the original lawsuit, told the World Socialist Web Site that Salazar "filed a special motion asking the court to lift the injunction, and he cited the BP drilling several times by name in the request."

          In July 2009, the court ruled that drilling in both the Gulf and off the coast of Alaska could continue, on the condition that the administration conduct a study of the potential environmental risks. This study has yet to be completed.
          ...

          "The same problems we saw under the Bush administration are continuing under Obama," Suckling said....

          http://www.wsws.org/...

          Don't let the awful be the enemy of the horrifically bad.

          by virtual0 on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:44:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I don't know how one person, even the President (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Liberal Thinking, pattym922

        can "take power away from corporations."  There are 3 branches of government.  One just gave corps MORE power. Over our elections. It will take all of us. It will take a long time.  It's clear from the screw job of Wall Street on the people, and the screw job of Big Oil on the people, and the constant screwing of companies that outsource jobs, that the people are screwed!!!  The media needs to be made to focus on this......

      •  I would like to talk to you. jaiyoduuuh@yahoo.co (0+ / 0-)
    •  Simply not correct. (8+ / 0-)

      http://www.nytimes.com/...

      Guy in charge of Gulf operations when lease was signed was a Bush promotee:

      Some in Congress had been trying to get rid of Mr. Oynes for a while. In 2007, Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Democrat of New York, voiced outrage that Mr. Oynes was, at the time, being promoted to gulf regional director at the minerals agency.

      Civil Service promotion. Not an appointee, cannot be fired at will.

      Further, department cleanup was ongoing:

      The inquiry began after investigators at the Office of the Inspector General received an anonymous letter, dated Oct. 28, 2008, addressed to the United States Attorney’s Office in New Orleans, alleging that a number of unnamed minerals agency employees had accepted gifts from oil and gas production company representatives, the report said.

      On April 12, Elizabeth Birnbaum, director of the minerals agency, received the report for review. The findings were to be released this summer.

      Not that all of Salazar's appointments have been good. Some have beenoutright awful.

      The point is, the people who approved these licenses were Bush promotoees not easily dislodged. If the Obama admin were going to get rid of them, they would've had to complete reorganize the bureau from day one. Feel free to argue they should have done that. (I might even agree. Keep in mind MMS is only one division of Interior.) But to say these leases were granted by Obama appointees is incorrect.

      Waffles Are Delicious!

      by nosleep4u on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:51:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He coulda been fired. (4+ / 0-)

        Clinton should have done it.  I have a big fat file about Oynes, studied up on him long before the latest episode erupted.  He was running leases in New Orleans back in the 90s, and put a bunch of 'em through that left out the part about paying royalties.  Cost us all (meaning the US Treasury) billions, even tens of billions of dollars.  That's a dismissal for cause, right there.

        Clinton didn't notice, or if he did, didn't fire him.  Bush-Cheney gave him a promotion - after that story hit the news.  Not that many people noticed it, I guess.

        You know, it sounded tone deaf to me that Obama announced a Commission to look at what's wrong.  That's long been seen as Washington code for kicking the can down the road.  WTF?  A friggin' commission?  Part of why MMS still functioned so badly was that they didn't take decisive action - they waited over a year for the IG report.  And hadn't yet had time to actually get around to dealing with it.  It was no secret that MMS was a mess.

        When Bush Cheney came in, he didn't wait for no frickin' commission.  He pushed through all kinds of policies and appointments - hit the ground running from day one to enable rapacious corporate exploitation.  Obama?  He appoints a commission, has the IG prepare a report.  Might deal with it sometime, a year or two down the road.  But not now.

        Carbon and climate change were already beyond urgent.  This thing is more proof.  Appoint a commission?  WTF?  Strikes me as tone deaf when people have lost their livelihoods and an ecosystem is being poisoned.  As did the admission that they had been accepting everything BP said, hook line and sinker.  Holy cow!  Really?  Dangerously naive, that.  But hey:  Obama didn't get the name of MMS right in the press conference.  It doesn't mean he doesn't really know what's going on - but it certainly leaves that impression.

        You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

        by Land of Enchantment on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:04:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, I know about those dirty leases. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a night owl, jonnie rae

          Agree that Clinton should have canned him.

          Unfortunately, once they were reviewed and the decision made not to fire him, the dirty leases became no good as grounds for firing in the future. Obama/Salazar couldn't fire him.

          As for BushCo's methods of packing agencies ... I'd rather those not be used. Had quite enough of that ugliness.

          After Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush, there aren't many progressive civil servants to promote, so there's a big problem, but having agencies be massively turned over every time the WH changes hands is IMO not a good solution. Look at the NLRB.

          Waffles Are Delicious!

          by nosleep4u on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:01:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  MMS gave the exclusion (0+ / 0-)

      Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the making of this post, but millions of electrons may have been severely inconvenienced.

      by USArmyParatrooper on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:42:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I didn't say Obama did it. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Liberal Thinking, musing85

        Not personally.  What I said was that the Obama Adminstration did it.  Well, actually, I said "Obama Admin", to be perfectly accurate.  MMS is under the Executive Branch of government.  The President's the head of the Executive Branch of government.  As part of the Exectuive Branch of government, MMS is part of the Obama Administration.

        Nice straw man, there.

        You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

        by Land of Enchantment on Mon May 31, 2010 at 02:05:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Saying "the Obama administration" (0+ / 0-)

          Leaves the impression that he was directly involved. On technical merit, you are correct. Based on your criteria there is a shit load of moving parts and happenings that no administration can possibly keep track of.

          A fair argument is to point out Obama did little or nothing to clean up MMS and I certainly don't mind it being put that way. I have no idea if that was on the agenda for the future or not, but he's been dealing with pulling out of Iraq, restructuring Afghanistan, the economy, Israel, health care, Iran, Taiwan, wall street reform and probably a shit load of other stuff I haven't mentioned. Nobody could have predicted this would happen and in all likelihood it would have happened under any administration.

          I get the distinct impression with certain people on here - that they're just itching to view everything Obama does in the worst possible light. Of course nobody will outright say as much. Many will also argue that this site is full of Obamabots who refuse to criticize him for anything.

          Take a look at my last diary, a social experiment.

          http://www.dailykos.com/...

          Now look how freely those who give high marks to Obama are willing to express criticisms. Now look at how few Obama critics were willing to post at all, and the majority who did literally could not find anything "good" about Obama, as if he's just all bad. Sorry, but that's not rational.

          Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the making of this post, but millions of electrons may have been severely inconvenienced.

          by USArmyParatrooper on Mon May 31, 2010 at 03:16:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Small correction: Korea, not Taiwan (0+ / 0-)

            I meant to say Korea, and I have no idea why I typed Taiwan.

            Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the making of this post, but millions of electrons may have been severely inconvenienced.

            by USArmyParatrooper on Mon May 31, 2010 at 03:18:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I made clear distinction... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            musing85

            ... in my comment.  There were things I said were "Obama Administration", and other things (such as saying offshore drilling is safe) which I credited directly to Obama.  I know the difference and was careful about the distinction.  Perhaps you didn't notice how careful I was about it.

            You cannot save the Gulf. But you can make its death mean something. -- Crashing Vor

            by Land of Enchantment on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:27:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Tipped and Rec'd (18+ / 0-)

    I was very upset by Peggy Noonan's editorial. I then come to DK and there's more doomsayers and people beating up on Obama.

    Thanks for saying outright this is BP's fault, not Barack Obama's.

    To me, it is obvious Republicans want to spin this in a way to undermine the progressive agenda. They want to spin this to say if big government messed up an oil spill, how can government be trusted to expand health care, administer jobs programs, run poverty programs, and solve climate change? That way corporations can continue to run all these things.

    We need to push back against that. not against our own.

    "Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable" - Dorothy Day

    by joedemocrat on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:00:55 PM PDT

    •  amen joe (9+ / 0-)

      "....while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." Eugene V. Debs

      by soothsayer99 on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:07:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  ummm. (9+ / 0-)

      it's peggy noonan. this is all she does.
      GOP right wing  speechwriter for Reagan with undying crush on him.
      and this is daily kos.
      who have been screaming OH NOEZ we are doomed Obama is toast since 2007.
      and use any excuse to scream some variation of that line.

      "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

      by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:07:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Someone should tell Ms. Noonan that anger is not (5+ / 0-)

        going to stop the leak. If it could the anger from the environmental movement would have it plugged up weeks ago.
        So much of this is frustration with B.P. and most corporations, and it is being laid at the feet of President Obama. Much the same way the loss of jobs is causing frustration. It is not as if this President or any President has the power to wave a magic wand and simply create jobs, and it is not as if he has the capability to plug the leak. Just as the average person had nothing to do with the financial collapse, but still they felt the results, the same thing is happening with this, the average person has nothing to do with this and the average people are those who are feeling the pain of this disaster.
        Do we really want a President who would be running around screaming with his hair on fire? When something bad happens in your personal life, it is better to stay calm and in control and deal with the problem, when it is taken care of or it blows over, there is plenty of time for emotion and anger. I have heard over and over again that this administration is politically tone deaf. So what, not everything should be treated like a political situation. I wish these pundits who pretend to know this President so very well would simply STFU and perhaps do something constructive for a change.

        •  Anger could stop the leak. (0+ / 0-)

          Passivity clearly will not. Let's give anger a chance.

          British Petroleum: I think that means it's foreign oil.

          by Bensdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:49:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think anger will stop the leak, it is (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Christin, pattym922, soothsayer99

            going to take more than that, it is going to take some real know how. Clearly B.P. wants it stopped, they are losing money the longer it goes on, I simply think it is impossible to stop it until the other wells are drilled. Everything they tried has failed. It is a very sad fact, but it appears to be the reality of the situation. They should not have been allowed to drill there in the first place. Additionally, they should never be able to drill in deep water ever again.

      •  Yep, as I recall it, most people here were ... (4+ / 0-)

        John Edwards supporters until it was clear that he had no chance.  THAT would have worked out real well!  

        •  ack! (6+ / 0-)

          i was a dual supporter.
          i recc'd the O and the JE diaries.
          happy if either won.
          oh lord.
          that man took my money (JE).
          i want it back.
          honest to god it makes me almost cry.
          i want it back so i can send it my favorite charity, The Farm Sanctuary.
          so aggravating.
          i donated the night before he dropped out.
          i hope someone worthy got the money.

          "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

          by Christin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:49:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  thanks for the perspective (0+ / 0-)

        my husband often tells me not to come to this site because it just gets me depressed.

  •  this was very good on this subject (9+ / 0-)

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    And they want to turn us against Obama  for it.  And they're trying to blame the oil disaster on the government, even though the corporations did it, and the government was prevented from intervening.  Always the same playbook. - Jay

    Gulf gusher? Gulf crusher, more like it.

    by Miep on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:02:45 PM PDT

  •  You, young man, are (14+ / 0-)

    very insightful. Thank you.

    "Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

    by TheWesternSun on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:03:08 PM PDT

  •  thank you -- YES (9+ / 0-)

    this is an opportunity to bury the failed right ideology of de-regulation..

    it is an opportunity for government to assert power against the corporations..

    that requires locating the blame squarely where it belongs -- at the feet of thirty plus years of de-regulation and laizze-faire luncacy

    "....while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." Eugene V. Debs

    by soothsayer99 on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:09:35 PM PDT

  •  People have trouble accepting that some problems (8+ / 0-)

    are too complicated for a fast solution. This isn't Katrina. Katrina was ABOVE GROUND. You know, where federal government can do things. This is a mile beneath the ocean surface. What do they all want Obama to do, dive in with scuba gear and a magic wand?

    Crescat scientia; vita excolatur

    by AxmxZ on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:14:15 PM PDT

    •  Hmmmm (7+ / 0-)

      This isn't Katrina. Katrina was ABOVE GROUND. You know, where federal government can do things. This is a mile beneath the ocean surface.

      So maybe someone (can't imagine who) should have thought about this before allowing oil companies to drill at such depths?

      A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

      by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:36:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is what is driving me crazy about this whole (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        yoduuuh do or do not, nippersdad

        thing. Who approved such a thing? I am of the mind that with everything you do in life, you need to be prepared for the worst thing happening. If you are going to drill a mile down in the ocean, you need to have a plan if something goes wrong. Nothing ever goes according to plan, "shit happens". If you are unable to personally fix something should it  happen, then you should not give assurances that it is o.k. Someone had to approve this drilling operation and that is the person who needs to be held accountable as well as the folks from B.P.

        •  Absolutely! (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          YucatanMan, WisePiper, JesseCW

          The rig may have been BP's, but the lease came from the U.S. Government with the implicit assurance that they knew what they were doing when they gave it to them. I honestly do not see how you can blame a lion for eating the lambs in this case; this is what extractionist industry does.

          Look at the list of superfund sites attributable to extractionist industry and it quickly becomes laughable to hear anyone in authority say who could have predicted.

          A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

          by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:47:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  See my comment above (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Christin, sunbro, jonnie rae

          Drilling was licensed by Bush civil service promotees. Links provided.

          BTW, looks like that guy (Chris C Oynes) resigned suddenly a few days ago.

          Waffles Are Delicious!

          by nosleep4u on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:59:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That doesn't explain, however, why (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            YucatanMan, WisePiper, JesseCW

            Salazar intervened in court on behalf of BP to get the well under production.

            Looks like Oynes was a sacrificial lamb.

            A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

            by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:01:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Do you have a link to that? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nippersdad

              thanks

              Waffles Are Delicious!

              by nosleep4u on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:24:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm sorry, I can't do links. (0+ / 0-)

                I really need to learn how to do those. There have been a lot of stories about it so it should come right up on a Google search. I have seen several at HuffPo alone; a search there should be productive if you care to do one.

                A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

                by nippersdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:27:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Here ya go (3+ / 0-)

                  Obama administration blocked efforts to stop BP oil drilling before explosion
                  By Joe Kishore
                  10 May 2010

                  In 2009, the Obama administration intervened to support the reversal of a court order that would have halted offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Obama’s Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who has long had close ties to the industry, specifically cited BP’s Deepwater Horizon operation as one that should be allowed to go forward, according to a group involved in the court case.

                  A Washington DC Appeals Court ruled in April 2009 that the Bush administration’s five-year plan for offshore oil and gas drilling (covering 2007 to 2012) was not based on a proper review of the environmental impact of the drilling. Only days before the ruling, the Obama administration had granted BP a "categorical exclusion," exempting it from an environmental impact study for the Deepwater Horizon project.

                  The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry trade group, intervened to reverse the court order, and was backed by the administration.

                  Kierán Suckling, executive director and founder the Center for Biological Diversity, which was involved in the original lawsuit, told the World Socialist Web Site that Salazar "filed a special motion asking the court to lift the injunction, and he cited the BP drilling several times by name in the request."..

                  http://www.wsws.org/...

                  Don't let the awful be the enemy of the horrifically bad.

                  by virtual0 on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:40:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Oynes a "sacrificial lamb"?????? (0+ / 0-)

              You can't be serious - the guy's hands are all over the Deepwater lease.

              •  Sure they are, but BP couldn't start drilling (0+ / 0-)

                without an exception to the ban which made it inoperative.

                A Republican is someone who can't enjoy his privileged position unless he is certain that somewhere, someone is in excruciating agony. I Love OCD

                by nippersdad on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:09:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Just because you resign, that doesn't or (0+ / 0-)

            should get you off the hook.  I say we get him back put him on trail or something and make him pay for this mess. Someone needs to be responsible for approving this disaster.

            •  I agree he should be prosecuted (0+ / 0-)

              Never said he shouldn't.

              Although I'm not sure he can be.

              This same guy approved 700 faulty contracts before Bush promoted him. The fault being government royalties were let out. If they couldn't prosecute him for that there's probably not much hope on this one. Something needs to change in the law; this level of malfeasance surely should be criminal.

              Waffles Are Delicious!

              by nosleep4u on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:29:06 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  We've had wells this deep (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AxmxZ

        for decades. The depth is not per se a problem.

    •  Magic wand argument (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan

      it's getting tired.

  •  Joan Walsh quoting Peggy Noonan. (4+ / 0-)

    Well, that's enough for me.

    "Philosophy is useless; theology is worse"--Dire Straits

    by Bush Bites on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:14:18 PM PDT

    •  Peggy Noonan is a hack. (0+ / 0-)

      She may as well have written for the Soviet Communists' TASS and Pravda.

      The degree of Noonan's objectivity is in the zero range.  She ought to party with Charles Krauthammer.  They could head a dittohead good time together.  

      -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

      by sunbro on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:06:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've resigned myself to the fact (14+ / 0-)

    that there are going to be people who, no matter what the issue, are upset with Obama and will display their displeasure as much as they can. I've learned to read the legit criticisms and ignore the attacks. It's hard to filter, but it's possible.

    Thank you for this, YoungChicagoDemocrat.

    BP is my new nom-de-oil-plume
    Follow me on Twitter!

    by weatherdude on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:17:58 PM PDT

    •  And what about those, yourself perhaps included, (0+ / 0-)

      who, no matter what the issue, will cheer Obama and anything he does, simply because it is he that does it? And those, yourself perhaps among them, who will give the president credit for anything that they think is good and that happened on his watch, but who will not hear a single word of criticism for anything bad?

      There are two sides to criticism of the president--the diarist got that much right. But what he (and you) seem to have missed is that the deplorable sides are hyperbolic criticism and equally hyperbolic praise. The diarist criticized only one of them.

  •  The 800 pound Gorilla is: (8+ / 0-)

    That way too many Americans believe that Reagan (and his fellow travelers) was right - "starve the best" "the Government is the enemy" and "trickle down." BP is merely a symptom of this insanity.

    For 20 years - even Democrats - have had to bow close to Reagan's Mantra's or suffer at the poles. Way too many Americans think "Freedom", "Liberty" and "Free Enterprise" mean that government is merely a parasite on the body politic - way too many of you do not want an actual "Civil Society" but merely an "Industrial Military" "11 Nuclear Carrier Battle Group" penis with the absolute minimum of regulation and oversight as possible - none is even better than a little.

    You've Agency after Agency MANNED by people who's role there is to ensure that the Agency does NOTHING - all the better to de-fang the "beast."

    As a Canadian observer - I don't see the States as a real country, in a "Civil Society" sort of way but more as a collection of 300+ million zealots searching for PERSONAL "Freedom" and "Liberty" regardless of the impact on their neighbours - or even themselves.

    Pity really - seriously - a pity.

    •  I saw this bumper sticker the other day on a car (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Liberal Thinking, Agathena, ganymeade

      alongside one that said, "yes you did, are you sorry yet?" The bumper sticker I am talking about said, Socialism=Slavery/Capitalism=Freedom.
      I was waiting for the owner to come out of the store just to ask Freedom for Who or is that Whom? As of late seeing what capitalism run wild has brought us, I am not so sure it is the best idea.

  •  reacting to protect our shores (4+ / 0-)

    is what I expect him to do as best as possible...

    I find that he has lacked in these regards:

    - protecting marshlands - protecting safety workers - reacting quickly to requests from people like Parrish mayors.

    and possibly protecting further damage to the wild - use of toxic dispersant..

    there will always be the problem..ie Katrina, San FRan earthquake, etc..

    and trhe reaction to protect innocents..

    I find his efforts to be lacking in this regard...

    better than most on a relative scale...lacking nevertheless on an absolute scale.

    •  Dr. Riki Otts, a marine toxicologist said today (3+ / 0-)

      that the EPA is rubber stamping BP's awful decisions. Workers are getting very ill cleaning up that disaster in the Gulf. That has got to stop. President Obama has got to stop EPA's rubber stamping.

      Make BP stop using the toxic dispersants.
      Make BP give the workers respirators not hard hats.

      I don't care whether the President gets emotional or not - just get it done.

      This above all: to thine own self be true...-WS

      by Agathena on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:43:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Excellent description of what the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Agathena

        Administration (EPA) Approved Dispersant Use is doing in the gulf is found here:

        http://www.nytimes.com/...

        As I swam back to the surface, some big fish came up to the boat — cobia, amberjacks weighing up to 60 pounds — looking for a handout. These are the fish that have made the Gulf a famously productive fishing area. But they rely on the forage fish that are now being devastated by the combined effects of oil and chemical dispersants. In a short time, the predator fish will either starve or sicken and die from eating highly contaminated forage fish.

        Yes, the dispersants have made for cleaner beaches. But they’re not worth the destruction they cause at sea, far out of sight. It would be better to halt their use and just siphon and skim as much of the oil off the surface as we can. The Deepwater Horizon spill has done enough damage, without our adding to it.

        Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better. -- Harry S Truman

        by YucatanMan on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:40:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Oh nice. (5+ / 0-)

    Which side are we on?

    You're either with us or against us!

    Now watch this drive.

    Help me, Professor Guyfucker! - dkos hatemail

    by indiemcemopants on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:32:08 PM PDT

  •  Well, maybe not 100% BP's fault (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, billmosby

    Some of the fault may belong with its contractors.  And some may well belong with the operational level personnel at MMS (although those who simply approve faulty procedues don't have as much culpability as those who design and carry them out).

    But to anybody who has worked in the federal government, or in any other large organizaton, it should be abundantly obvious that neither the President nor anybody within several levels of his office knew anything about these specific permits before this disaster happened.  They COULDN'T know, given everything else that they've got on their plate.

    •  ummm - BP is responsible for its contractors - (0+ / 0-)

      Just because it chose to use contractors does not in any way mitigate its liability/responsibility.

      •  That's only true if they're judgment proof (0+ / 0-)

        If they're solvent (which they clearly are), everybody is liable for some proportionate share of liability.

        •  no - BP is liable to third parties for the (0+ / 0-)

          acts of its contractors although it can certainly try to recoup some of its liability from its contractor(s).

          •  I don't think we're really disagreeing (0+ / 0-)

            Yes, BP is legally liable for the whole thing (at least assuming they're negligent or the cap is removed), but as a practical matter, the proportionate liability would be divided among them and their contractors in a single proceeding.

            But I wasn't primarily talking about liability, but fault, and there clearly seems to have been plenty of that to go around, even though there rather clearly is no legal liability on the federal government for issuing the permits.

            •  The fault is BP's - it selected the contractors (0+ / 0-)

              and either didn't include proper contractual provisions or, if it did, elected to waive its rights under those provisions. You're correct technically on the likelihood of a consolidated proceeding but, as to the rest of the world, BP will be liable whether or not it is able to lay a portion of responsibility on its contractors . ..

  •  You keep missing the point. (7+ / 0-)

    This isn't a local crisis. It is a national crisis and, yes, it is bigger than Katrina. I say that as someone who owned a place in New Orleans during Katrina and as someone who saw the immediate after affects of that storm. I showered in water that was so laced with chlorine, I smelled like bleach for a month, which, for a guy is an embarrassing smell.

    Look -- stop defending President Obama. The simple fact is he has not lead on this issue. He is, in fact, proving to be a pretty poor leader all the way around. Here was a golden opportunity to come out on day one -- day one!-- and say that he had been wrong about the wisdom of drilling offshore, that we needn't to seriously look for other sources of energy and then announce that he is relocating to New Orleans until the damn leak is fixed.

    Again, he doesn't have to fix it. He just has to look like he is ON IT. Instead, he handed it over to BP without having a back up plan of his own, and here we are -- over a month into it with BP promising it will be at least another two months.

    The Gulf cannot take another two months of this.

    I don't know what the solution is but I know what the President has to do: he has to lead. You are in the minority in thinking that he has done that. He hasn't. His response has been pathetic, detached and worse, yes, worse than Bush's.

    Katrina was a major blow to New Orleans, but it came back because it didn't alter its character.

    This will alter the character of New Orleans, South Louisiana and coastal Mississippi for generations.

    Too detached, too disengaged, not rolling his sleevs up to work on the solution. He just hasn't led here.

    British Petroleum: I think that means it's foreign oil.

    by Bensdad on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:41:14 PM PDT

  •  I fall madly in ... (5+ / 0-)
    ... love with any diary that can get on the rec list and still employ common sense, logic and straight facts.  

    I heart "Stop The Insanity---Which side are we on?"  I've tipped and rec'd you.  Now, what are you doing NEXT weekend?  Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, saynomore.  

    "Obama, Obama, I love ya, Obama; you're only November away" -- cute ginger kid

    by Tortmaster on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:41:22 PM PDT

  •  I am not criticizing Obama for any PR issue, (5+ / 0-)

    and I know mistakes are made, but I do have one question about those dispersants, which, I have come to understand have made it 1000x worse (unless I am mistaken) and serve only to cover up the damage done by BP ... ie, the decision to employ dispersants was made by the Private Corporate BP interests, not a Whitehouse public interest. This issue needs to be addressed, because this ain't a speculation thing, nor a PR thing, this is the difference of whether life in our ocean will die, or not. The WH cannot claim to be in command, if they let BP make these sorts of decision.

    If the oil had been boomed, sucked, skimmed, etc., it would have still been a visible problem, and some larger species would have been affected.  Nasty photo ops would have abounded.  Heaven forbid, beaches would be fouled for a time, and (oh, no) TOURISTS would not want to bake themselves on the oily sand...

    But hiding the oil in the water column with dispersants magnifies the death toll a thousandfold.

    NYT: Swimming Through the Spill ...

    ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

    by ArthurPoet on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:42:11 PM PDT

  •  I'm on my side (9+ / 0-)

    I'm on the side of the environment. I'm on the side of good government.

    I refuse to ever buy into the "you're either with us, or against us" position.

    When the POTUS does a good thing, I'll support it. Doesn't matter what party he comes from.

    I refuse to accept the false argument that since Obama did not cause this disaster, he is above reproach regarding the federal government's RESPONSE to what BP has wrought.

    I will never accept the false arguments of "follow the leader."

    I have a couple of figures in history whom I admire, among them Socrates and Einstein. Everyone else puts their pants on one leg at a time.

  •  Obama isn't Bush (3+ / 0-)

    Bush would go all cowboy without any regard for the rules in place and existing law.

    Obama will respect the laws and regulations.

    Obama needs to tell the country that is the change they voted for.

    That meme could counter the Beckian Teabagger meme that Obama is a totalitarian. Bush was the totalitarian.

    I'm no Nate Silver, TomTech, or VoteforAmerica ("WineRev" Eeman, Recounting Minnesota)

    by Tomtech on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:47:17 PM PDT

  •  nothing about this disaster (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agathena, YucatanMan, bluicebank, JesseCW

    is "silly" except the suggestion that criticism of the WH response is unwarranted.

    "History is a tragedy, not a melodrama." - I.F.Stone

    by bigchin on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:54:48 PM PDT

  •  The OPA should be required reading here (2+ / 0-)

    I'm just starting to familiarize myself with it, but the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 is where it's all laid out how responses to this kind of event are supposed to be handled.  It was written in response to the Exxon Valdez disaster.

    http://www.epa.gov/...

    It looks like a lot of the regulatory requirements were not met as well as the contingency planning but there was nothing Obama could do about that because it was all before his time.

    ---
    Toyota: Proof US Union Labor Still Does it Better

    by VelvetElvis on Sun May 30, 2010 at 10:58:07 PM PDT

  •  Oh those mean mean lefties (4+ / 0-)

    Why can't they just leave the man alone?

  •  BP was not alone, they got the go ahead from MMS (5+ / 0-)

    they had the rule for a blow-out plan waived, environmental assessment waived. They did not invade the Gulf of Mexico, they were welcomed with open arms and given carte blanche to do what they wanted unhindered by any regulatory body of the United States government.

    This above all: to thine own self be true...-WS

    by Agathena on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:23:48 PM PDT

  •  It may be BP's fault (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YucatanMan, Got a Grip, saildude, JesseCW

    but it is Obama's responsibility.  If he did not want such responsibilities, or is incapable of handling such responsibilities, then he should never have sought, nor ever should have been elected to, the office of President of the United States.

    We who have been nothing shall be all. This is the final struggle. ~E. Pottier

    by ActivistGuy on Sun May 30, 2010 at 11:31:23 PM PDT

    •  The diarist is gone now (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      musing85, ganymeade, JesseCW

      as per his/her latest update.

      The diarist has to study for SATs.

      And the rantings of a pre-SAT teenager sit on the rec list.  

      Meanwhile, oil gushes into the Gulf, Israel just attacked the humanitarian flotilla for Gaza in international waters, people are getting killed in two wars at this moment.  US special ops are publicly going on in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere, millions lose jobs and homes...

      But the hair on fire defense of the president by a teen from Chicago is more important than all of that.

      Why do I stay here?  I really don't know.

      •  The rantings of a pre-SAT teen (0+ / 0-)

        in the form of an exceptionally well written diary, and well deserving of the rec list.

        Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the making of this post, but millions of electrons may have been severely inconvenienced.

        by USArmyParatrooper on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:14:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We'll have to disagree on that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musing85

          More like a factually challenged, overly apologist opinion a pre-SAT teen who claims that people are saying that his/her hero, Pres. Obama, caused the oil well blowout. And that's just one example.

          This is a diary who asks us to "stop the insanity" and to take sides.  The diarist is right that there is a lot of insanity in this world, but do note that the insanity the diarist refers to is criticism of the President of the US, arguably the most powerful person in the world.

          Anyway, carry on.  Nothing I say or do would make even cause a true believer to rethink anything for even 15 seconds.  It's a complete waste of time.  I'll see you on the other side, when you wake up and realize what's really going on in this country.

  •  Many folks on the left need to pull it together (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jonnie rae

  •  The President teared up as Bebe Winans performed, (3+ / 0-)

    "Stand" at Dorothy Height's Memorial Service. I am haunted by that show of emotion. Read the words of Stand:

    (What do you do) when you've done all you can
    And it seems like it's never enough
    And what do you say when your friends turn away
    And you're al l alone
    Tell me what do you give when you've given your all
    And it seems like you can't make it through
    Well you just stand, when there's nothing left to do
    You just stand, watch the Lord see you through
    Yes after you've done all you can, you just stand...

    Barack Obama took up his job as President with a vigor, sense of purpose and enthusiasm not seen in the history of man. He had so much on his plate. He  was indefatigable! But from day one, the "left" has been criticizing and whining and moaning and stinking up the place with fucking incessant negativity. We have all contributed to fucking up this country and now we stand with folded arms waiting for him to do it all, pointing fingers, advising, criticizing and condemning.
    I am past furious with the fear-weather friends. I am past furious with the know-everything, holier-than-thou, more-progressive-than-Che-Guevara, know-nothing-do-shit crowd.

    I am so sick of them all I could vomit at the mere thought of them.

    Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

    by JoanMar on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:07:25 AM PDT

    •  ...fairweather friends... (0+ / 0-)

      Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

      by JoanMar on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:21:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wait- (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      musing85, ganymeade

      He teared up when he heard a song you dig...

      And Presidentin' is hard...

      So you suffer from nausea when anyone suggests he might be doing less than a perfect job?

      I am past furious with the fear-weather friends

      I'm long past carring about the opinions of people so delusional that they think they're friends with the President, "fair-weather" or otherwise.

      Alot of junkies would be headed for rehab if they blew a vein this badly. Apparently, oil is better than smack.

      by JesseCW on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:52:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  High School. I still can't believe (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sunbro, jonnie rae

    you are in high school.  YoungChicagoDemocrat, you amaze.

    We need to teach people that the environment has a direct bearing on our own benefit. Dalai Lama

    by maggiejean on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:26:55 AM PDT

  •  We should not be on the side (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Liberal Thinking, ganymeade

    of a president that does not live up to his promises.

    We should not be on the side of a party that supports and defends war criminals, torturers and the Bush administrations unconstitutional policies.

    Why has Obama allowed the obvious and well known problems at MMS to continue in his administration. Why the diarist is willing to absolve the Obama administration for failing to do their job is baffling. Just because this president is a dem does not mean they are not responsible for failing to regulate these corporations.

    The snowball of Obama failures and broken promises is getting bigger daily. We need to identify a new candidate as Obama is in over his head.

    When war profiteering ends America will start winning its wars again.

    by saildude on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:32:45 AM PDT

  •  33 days in... (0+ / 0-)

    & take a chill pill? After deferring everything to BP? No thank-you, if anything it should make people more outraged & proactive. Go figure...

    I did campaign on the public option, and I'm proud of it! Corporat Democrats will not get my vote, hence I will not vote.

    by Jazzenterprises on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:42:31 AM PDT

  •  Sorting It Out (0+ / 0-)

    Obviously, a lot of the criticism of Obama on this has been baseless, and a lot of it malicious. But, he is due some constructive criticism, so let's start with that.

    He should have been much more open to progressive policy all along. By shutting out progressives at the top level and by not paying adequate attention when we have the correct ideas for addressing problems, he's made some severe mistakes. Approving more offshore drilling was a severe mistake, and the BP disaster points that out. It should be particularly nettlesome to him and his team to have this go off almost immediately after he (shunning the progressives) announced that he wanted to open up vast new stretches to offshore drilling. I shudder to think what will happen when he launches some initiative to start up more nuclear power plants.

    That said, he is not responsible for the specific spill. He didn't give any order (as far as I know) to ignore safety and environmental concerns with this or any other oil rig. The immediately responsible party, Salazar, should have taken a much more active role in reforming MMS, but one can hardly call that much of a criticism. He should not have to go to each cubicle in his department and check to make sure that the occupant is following the law.

    I think the President is actually taking on too much. He needs to be clear about the responsibility and the accountability of each party. Here are some guidelines:

    BP is responsible for the accident. That's clear from all that's come out about it. They ordered the people on the rig to continue going operational against their advice. They obviously ignored prior problems. They may be legally culpable (and probably are), but to put it plainly, they are responsible for the accident and they are responsible for the environmental and economic impact of it.

    The President is responsible for the federal response to the accident. He is not responsible for the accident happening. He took no action that caused it, and by sending pretty clear orders to the entire federal bureaucracy that he wanted competence, he took at least that distinct action to prevent it. (By opening up more offshore drilling, he sent mixed signals about how much he cares about the environment, however.)

    The President is accountable to the American people for taking all actions to mitigate the damage and to clean it up. He has done a good job, IMO, on that score. He got the federal bureaucracy in operation immediately, he went to the area in due time and followed that up with another visit this last week. He has made himself available to talk about it and answer questions. I think he could do more to bring BP in line, but overall I don't think he's done that bad a job of getting things done. If things are slow, then I'm willing to believe that's in the nature of sending an organization with hundreds of thousands of people into action. I don't see the advantage of the President whipping them harder or getting in their faces (which to me means just getting in their way).

    BP is accountable to the government to stop the leak and put things right. I don't think they have enough money to ever put things right, and it's clear they didn't have anything in place to immediately stop the leak. Ultimately, I think it will be the courts that hold BP accountable, if they do, and not the President.

    There are a lot of changes that need to be made. One of them, restructuring and cleaning up MMS has apparently already happened. But, the most important thing that has to happen is that official policy has to change with regard to the ever expanding energy production industry. It has to stop expanding at the expense of the environment. If we are going to keep on increasing our standard of living and expanding our population, then we will have to get the additional functionality by conserving energy and by tapping renewable sources. Congress is responsible for that, and I think we should all plan to hold them accountable for it.

  •  We should use this opportunity (0+ / 0-)

    To tell BP and both of the parties to fuck off. Make no mistake, this is not a democracy, it's a corporate dictatorship. Bush, Obama: both in the tank for big oil at the expense of billions of tax dollars and nonsensical wars.
    Lest we forget, Obama was the one who called for the Increase in deep sea drilling! If this was McCain making the exact same decisions regarding oil, you all know you'd be raising hell.
    We should encourage the public to rise up against both of these pathetic corporatist parties. This is the greatest enviormental disaster in our nations history, expect this oil spill to end of on your dinner plates.
    Both parties have been bought off, the corporations call the shots, not the voters.
    This oil spill has really changed my perspective...
    I'm sick and tired of working to elect corporatists.

    Please join the new facebook group, "We want Howard Dean back in charge" and spread the word!

    by astronautagogo on Mon May 31, 2010 at 01:55:53 AM PDT

  •  The Left Is Right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    musing85

    It's not that simple. The "left camp" (if you mean "some of those on the Left") has all the standing it needs to criticize the President. He has been totally ignoring us when we've been giving him good advice. In particular, he shouldn't have ignored the advice to stop drilling off the coast that pretty much every environmentalist (let's just stipulate they're almost all on the left) was giving him all along.

    The President could be getting very solid support from the left right now. We could have his back. But there's a minor problem. He hasn't given us any reason whatsoever to support him. From the get-go where he appointed Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff to his failure to stand up for the public option to an energy policy that's materially undifferentiated from that of Dick Cheney (and, why isn't he on trial, BTW?), the President has burned every bridge to his base that he could find. We could support him now, but with all due respect, what's in it for us? I don't like being taken advantage of.

    I don't think we should be unfairly critical of him, but really, I don't think we are. If he wants to get some support, how about he come out with something like:

    I've learned my lesson and it will be a cold day in hell before I'll see any more drilling off the coast.

    That would quiet a lot of the criticism.

  •  as another Chicago Democrat (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Christin

    a bit older than you, I thank you for this diary. I am both upset and depressed about the spill. As Democrats, why not be telling a counter narrative, which just happens to be the truth, about the failures of deregulation, which the GOP has been assiduously working toward It's not like someone won't cover what's happened since 2008 -- the media absolutely should -- but it doesn't have to be Democrats.

  •  Damn straight. Now be constructive: relief wells (0+ / 0-)

    drilled along with the primary well should be required for all deepwater drilling.

    It is unrealistic, politically, legally and economically, to simply demand an end to off-shore drilling.  Noonan and her ilk are just lying fools, who hope to make you forget that if any politician can be blamed it is they and theirs.  (Besides, you remember the lies Noonan gushed for Palin during the R-convention until she thought the mic was off?  A liar, plain and simple.)

    So, lets keep the focus where it needs to be: 1) hold BP accountible in a sufficiently significant way that is actually might change other's behavior (say by giving them the entire bill and expropriating their assets when they claim they don't have the $), 2) keeping the pressure on them to stop the leak and do/fund the clean-up, 3) consider changing laws essentially putting oil co.s in chagre of those things (the FDIC for oil, with clean up at least the fed's responsibility thus funded seems a good idea), and 4)make other changes to law and regulatory bodies as necessary (e.g., mandate co-incidence relief wells, restructuing MMS, banning regulator employment with companies for a real period - say 10 years after leaving the agency).

    Unless you want a Rethug Congress and President?  Cause that's all the unreasoning stupdity is likely to accomplish.

  •  Fer em or agin em? sounds like Bush talk to me. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    musing85

    Obama is being criticized because he's a consensus builder building consensus with the insane, thieves, liars, thugs, killers, and amoral corporations.  He was elected because he promised, and this country desperately wanted, "fundamental change" instead of business as usual.  Instead of correcting 40 years of the destruction of our economy and society, he's delivering a presidency that is a combination of Clinton and Bush's third terms.   All of this while ignoring reality and abandoning the principles of equal opportunity and justice for all.    What part of this equation don't you or he get? I hope somebody primary's his butt.   If he and the rest of the Democrats don't get or care about the gravity of the situation we are in economically and environmentally, he and they don't deserve their jobs.

    They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

    by dkmich on Mon May 31, 2010 at 03:54:01 AM PDT

    •  Every single presidential candidate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Christin

      runs on change. Including the Republicans.
      How does one man change "40 years of the destruction of our economy and society"?

      Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul, And sings the tune--without the words, And never stops at all. -Emily Dickinson

      by skohayes on Mon May 31, 2010 at 05:42:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He dies trying. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musing85

        Obama hasn't tried at all.  The health care bill is a corporate giveaway.  WS reform is a corporate giveaway.  Where was Obama during these debates?  Undermining single payer and everything else that had to do with real WS and health care reform.  The man is a corporatist.  He seeks consensus with theives, liars and thugs to protect the status quo, which makes him one of them or a fool.  This country is in crisis.  It doesn't need a rerun or continuance of Bush/Clinton policies.  If the man has no idea or ideals on how to help the people that voted for him, he doesn't belong in office.  I didn't trust him in 08, and he proves me right each and every day.  The least he could do is go down swinging.

        They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

        by dkmich on Mon May 31, 2010 at 05:51:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no wonder. (0+ / 0-)

          you are not to be taken seriously.
          you've despised him since Day one.  
          according to dkmich, he's a liar. a thief. a thug, a coroporatist.
          evil. bush lite. cheney lite. a fool.
          my god. get a damn grip.
          you sound worse than Rush Limbaugh at times, and then scream and cry when that is pointed out.

          what is annoying? i'm sure you don't support or follow what is nearest to Dennis's heart - yet you take on his name.
          ugh.

          Obama hasn't tried at all.  
          The health care bill is a corporate giveaway.  
          WS reform is a corporate giveaway.  
          Where was Obama during these debates?
          Undermining single payer and everything else that had to do with real WS and health care reform.  
          The man is a corporatist.
          He seeks consensus with theives, liars and thugs
          to protect the status quo, which makes him one of them or a fool.  
          This country is in crisis.
          It doesn't need a rerun or continuance of Bush/Clinton policies.

          If the man has no idea or ideals on how to help the people that voted for him, he doesn't belong in office.
           I didn't trust him in 08, and he proves

          "Oh no...you changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

          by Christin on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:27:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh please. You will defend him whether I (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            seabos84

            thought he was the best thing since sliced cheese or not.  He is on the wrong track.  He is following everything that everybody voted against.  He promised change, and we got more of the same.  Go right ahead and defend him into defeat.  I don't care who is President as long as they start working for the people instead of the rich and their corporations.  Obama is blowing it, and his biggest fans are the ones helping to defeat him.

            They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

            by dkmich on Mon May 31, 2010 at 09:33:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  The Last Time I Took Peggy Noonan Seriously . . . (0+ / 0-)

    Wait, I've NEVER taken Peggy Noonan seriously.

    Not voting gets Republicans elected. Gloating about it on DKOS isn't helpful either.

    by kefauver on Mon May 31, 2010 at 07:28:57 AM PDT

  •  thanks for this (0+ / 0-)

    good luck on the SAT's

  •  Too many Democrats want Obama (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thoughtful3

    to run the country that they think we should have, not the one we have. Obama isn't in charge of BP in the country we have. Nobody along the Gulf coast wanted the Feds to have the authority to prevent this. Hell, Landrieu, a Democrat, is still arguing the Feds shouldn't have the authority. The Senators don't want it, the Governors don't want it (they're opposed to even monitoring natural disasters, let alone industrial ones) and the public doesn't want it.

    Everyone saying Obama is at fault here is wishing the reality of the public sentiment in those areas away, just as the Teapartiers seem to think that only they are the true pulse of the nation, that only they know what's right for the country.

    Yes, elections matter, and yes Obama needs to pull this nation left - and he is. But he can't instantly make it a reflection of the DKos community. He can't even eventually make it that because we're not representative of the nation - we're not even close.

    After BP your ire needs to be directed to the 'drill baby drill' crowd. They're the ones that are pulling public policy against us. They're the ones saying that government is incompetent (and you're agreeing with them) and that only the free market can magically solve it. If you can't bring a constructive, positive role for government with relationship to an event like this then they've won. They don't need to bring a constructive, positive role for industry - the public assumes it'll 'just happen'.

    You criticize Obama without explaining what policy is in place that he violated. No policy there? Then the problem is larger than Obama - maybe it's with Congress, maybe it's with the public, maybe it's also with Obama, but it's not just him. What should that policy be? I'm not seeing that being discussed here in a serious way. Lots of 'this never should have happened'. Lots of 'we should never drill'. Not much explanation how people should get to work if gas prices go up 25%. Not much explanation of how we should fund public transit. Not much explanation how had BP been drilling another 100 miles (or however far) away on a Mexican lease how this situation would be any different, other than Mexico would be in charge.

    Of course you should be angry, but you also need to be disciplined. The nature of the criticism being offered here might as well be given out by people in 3 pointed hats and misspelled signs - because it's going to yield the same result - more Republicans, not better Democrats.

    Leave it to Republicans to set the house on fire and then rant that the fire department is socialist.

    by johnsonwax on Mon May 31, 2010 at 12:14:25 PM PDT

  •  My computer will not work right on this site. (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site