Reply #119: Your smug apologies for Obama are not helping. You are not helping, Obama had a chance

[scentopine]

to regulate and fix MMS from well documented problems. He deliberately chose not to. He kept things the same. This makes people angry.

Provide me the data that you say is accessible - provide it or stop telling people it won't help. You are arguing the null hypothesis and refusing to provide the data that would prove you are correct. Without the data you cannot make an argument that we don't need data. Man, what don't you get about that? Are you an MBA? Its not that complicated to understand the value of data.

Why is BP the right company to be in charge. You have not answered they question. You provided bullshit.

How much oil is leaking you have not answered the question. You provided bullshit.

First you say, don't believe the press. Then you say you agree the press should do its job. then you say don't believe the press. You provided bullshit.

Apologists are like a curse - every time they post, 100 more democrats stay home from the polls.

You say -BP however is 1) already on site, and 2) the liable party. Government takeover = government liability and BP goes away scott-free. We will then have to endure decades of complaints from people like you that BP wasn't held accountable by Obama.

They are not on site - their site burned down and sunk into the ocean, killed 11 people and is spewing oil.

I say Bullshit. The government CAN remove BP. One executive order is all it takes. You'd rather let this thing drag on and on poison 25% of Gulf just because it is easier than holding BP accountable AND getting them off the job?

You say - I've heard reports that other dispersants are more effective. I've also heard reports that other dispersants are less toxic. I haven't seen anyone list a dispersant that is both more effective and less toxic. Again, the choices are "bad", "worse" and "terrible". Do you go with more effective and more toxic, or less effective and less toxic?
WTF? Where? Provide the data!! The only data I can find IS FROM BP.

http://www.poten.com/NewsDetails.aspx?id=10392601
http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100601/GJLIFESTYLES/100609951/-1/CITNEWS


You say - Then point that anger at the idiots who caused the spill, and work with us to regulate offshore drilling out of existence. Instead, I fear you'll continue to fight against Obama and do your damnedest to ensure a Republican Congress in 2010 which will block all attempts at reform.

I say - Bullshit. We have a democratic controlled house and executive branch. Obama announced expanded off shore oil drilling. He put Salazar in place. He said drilling was safe. Tell me again how hard democrats are working to "change" things and Obama has no responsibility or accountability in this mess?

You don't have fire in you belly. Nor do you have the intellect to understand when bad engineering and science is at work. You have lied about what I have said and dodged every question. If you are smug and satisfied with Obama's leadership, the lack of data, the press restrictions, you are working for BP not for the good of the public. You are doing everything in your power to defend BP make sure BP stays in charge and trying to convince yus we should be satisfied with this because it is legally convenient for Obama.

Being cold and calculating over a massive catastrophe like this is perfect for Fortune 500 inspired leadership. It has no place in business of fixing difficult technological problems. In summary, you are a perfect repesentative of the new and ineffective democratic party. Right wing, just spewing Reagan neo-con talking points.

Tell me about all the pressure you are putting on the democrats to bad off-shore drilling? That would be 100% inconsistent with nearly every excuse you have made for keeping BP in charge. Are you saying the Gulf is a reasonable sacrifice to achieve some larger purpose. I hope not.