From: John B. on
On Jun 8, 4:34 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
> "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:56ad3d9c-bbe2-4147-a3e8-4c8ff3f5af0c(a)a30g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 8, 2:12 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:fcbe16fb-fef6-4323-9e00-3d1ae75dce77(a)c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com....
> > On Jun 8, 12:44 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>
> > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >On Jun 8, 10:30=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:00:51 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>
> > > >> <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >I have asked and asked and asked again what the government should
> > > >> >have
> > > >> >done that it hasn't done. All I've gotten so far is that they took a
> > > >> >long time to deliver some sand bags.
>
> > > >> They should have stopped the oil from reaching the beaches and
> > > >> wetland
> > > >> areas so no birds or sea life would have died.
>
> > > >How?
>
> > > By responding faster and better than they did. Every soiled beach and
> > > wet land is another Obama failure. And there are going to be a lot of
> > > them.
>
> > Responding how? With what? What makes you think the EPA should be
> > equipped to respond to a catastrophe of this magnitude? I know you
> > take a particular glee in blaming this on Obama, but you seem unable
> > to provide empirical support for it.
> > ******************************************************
>
> > The empirical evidence is in the marshes and on the beaches.
>
> And your view is that the EPA should have been able to keep millions
> of barrels of oil   from reaching shore? You've got to be kidding.
> ********************************************************
>
> My view is that the President sat on his hands for a month, before approving
> the sand berms last week.  Governor Jindal's requests were ignored as Obama
> did nothing.

I'm sure if he had delivered the sand berms earlier, things would be
very very different now.
From: Carbon on
On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:12:30 -0500, Moderate wrote:
> "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:fcbe16fb-
> fef6-4323-9e00-3d1ae75dce77(a)c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jun 8, 12:44 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>>> <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 8, 10:30=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:00:51 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have asked and asked and asked again what the government should
>>>>>> have done that it hasn't done. All I've gotten so far is that
>>>>>> they took a long time to deliver some sand bags.
>>>>>
>>>>> They should have stopped the oil from reaching the beaches and
>>>>> wetland areas so no birds or sea life would have died.
>>>>
>>>> How?
>>>
>>> By responding faster and better than they did. Every soiled beach
>>> and wet land is another Obama failure. And there are going to be a
>>> lot of them.
>>
>> Responding how? With what? What makes you think the EPA should be
>> equipped to respond to a catastrophe of this magnitude? I know you
>> take a particular glee in blaming this on Obama, but you seem unable
>> to provide empirical support for it.
>
> The empirical evidence is in the marshes and on the beaches.

It seems like you've gotten lost again. John has been asking what,
specifically, Obama might have done to reduce the impact of BP's oil
spill. Your sandbags are a joke. There are hundreds, thousands of miles
of coastline.

Why don't they just drain the Gulf? That might be easier.
From: Kenn Smith on
The real problem isn't with the surface oil which has stretched all
agencie's containment capability beyond their limits. Even a doomsday
worst case scenario probably wouldn't have been based on a spill of the
magnitude lasting this long - there are reasonable limits to advance
planning.

The real problem is the toxic mix of crude oil and methane floating in
"plumes" at depths of up to 3,300 feet. No one ever figured on
something like that. The first tar ball to wash up on Pensacola Beach
showed up when the surface slick was still ten miles offshore - it was
from a subsurface plume for which there is (currently) no defense.

No one has the first clue about what will happen to deep sea life forms
as those plumes ultimately find bottom and settle. No one really has
the first clue about how the deep sea life and the shallower depth life
interact or depend on each other. One thing you can bet on. At some
intermediate depth one form is in another's food chain.

While it may be fun to throw political harpoons back and forth, although
I really don't understand the "fun" found in being ugly and insulting -
not my gig, You clowns are ignoring the real threat to the planet. Yes,
the pictures of oil soaked pelicans and baby sand pipers are sad, the
surface damage can and will be repaired over time, either by man or
nature. Stopping the onshore flow should be, and is, a high priority.
Finding a way to deal with the subsurface damage should be equally as
high. The subsurface damage may never be repaired and for a generation
could turn the Gulf into the Dead Sea.

From: William Clark on
In article <hum9h0$4ec$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
"Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:

> "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:56ad3d9c-bbe2-4147-a3e8-4c8ff3f5af0c(a)a30g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 8, 2:12 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
> > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:fcbe16fb-fef6-4323-9e00-3d1ae75dce77(a)c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 8, 12:44 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
> >
> > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >On Jun 8, 10:30=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:00:51 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
> >
> > > >> <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >I have asked and asked and asked again what the government should
> > > >> >have
> > > >> >done that it hasn't done. All I've gotten so far is that they took a
> > > >> >long time to deliver some sand bags.
> >
> > > >> They should have stopped the oil from reaching the beaches and
> > > >> wetland
> > > >> areas so no birds or sea life would have died.
> >
> > > >How?
> >
> > > By responding faster and better than they did. Every soiled beach and
> > > wet land is another Obama failure. And there are going to be a lot of
> > > them.
> >
> > Responding how? With what? What makes you think the EPA should be
> > equipped to respond to a catastrophe of this magnitude? I know you
> > take a particular glee in blaming this on Obama, but you seem unable
> > to provide empirical support for it.
> > ******************************************************
> >
> > The empirical evidence is in the marshes and on the beaches.
>
> And your view is that the EPA should have been able to keep millions
> of barrels of oil from reaching shore? You've got to be kidding.
> ********************************************************
>
> My view is that the President sat on his hands for a month, before approving
> the sand berms last week. Governor Jindal's requests were ignored as Obama
> did nothing.

Sand berms are nothing to do with the heart of the problem. You are just
clutching at straws to try to smear Obama. That makes you an idiot.
From: Moderate on
William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote:
> In article <hum9h0$4ec$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>
> > "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:56ad3d9c-bbe2-4147-a3e8-4c8ff3f5af0c(a)a30g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jun 8, 2:12 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
> > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >
> > > news:fcbe16fb-fef6-4323-9e00-3d1ae75dce77(a)c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Jun 8, 12:44 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
> > >
> > > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >On Jun 8, 10:30=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 19:00:51 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
> > >
> > > > >> <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >I have asked and asked and asked again what the government
> > > > > > > should
> > > > >> >have
> > > > >> >done that it hasn't done. All I've gotten so far is that
> > > > > > > they took a
> > > > >> >long time to deliver some sand bags.
> > >
> > > > >> They should have stopped the oil from reaching the beaches
> > > > > > and
> > > > >> wetland
> > > > >> areas so no birds or sea life would have died.
> > >
> > > > >How?
> > >
> > > > By responding faster and better than they did. Every soiled
> > > > beach and
> > > > wet land is another Obama failure. And there are going to be a
> > > > lot of
> > > > them.
> > >
> > > Responding how? With what? What makes you think the EPA should be
> > > equipped to respond to a catastrophe of this magnitude? I know you
> > > take a particular glee in blaming this on Obama, but you seem
> > > unable
> > > to provide empirical support for it.
> > > ******************************************************
> > >
> > > The empirical evidence is in the marshes and on the beaches.
> >
> > And your view is that the EPA should have been able to keep millions
> > of barrels of oil from reaching shore? You've got to be kidding.
> > ********************************************************
> >
> > My view is that the President sat on his hands for a month, before
> > approving
> > the sand berms last week. Governor Jindal's requests were ignored
> > as Obama
> > did nothing.
>
> Sand berms are nothing to do with the heart of the problem. You are
> just
> clutching at straws to try to smear Obama. That makes you an idiot.
>

Then why did Obama finally approve the berms?
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Prev: funny thing
Next: Bongo stampede at World Cup