Where are all the people who claimed the skimmers were going to save us?

So, about a month ago, the Right Wing Noise Machine duped many into believing that "Obama" was intentionally preventing oil skimmers from helping in the Gulf because he hates America, and wants to destroy the Gulf.

So, now that oil skimmers are clearly not useful in this kind of cleanup (media is saying they cleaned up about 3% of the crude)... I'm wondering where all those folks went?

Come on guys! We're you go? What happened to those claims?

Perhaps political madness is a better forum considering this thread seems to be more about the left right paradigm then the disaster itself?

Respectfully,

~meathead

Perhaps. But i feel it directly relates to the BP spill forum because there were numerous threads claiming that these Skimmers were intentionally delayed to prevent a successful clean up.

Now we are being told they have cleaned up a total of 3%.

I'm not trying to argue some left right nonsense. I'm not defending 'Obama" or the "LEft".

just pointing out there were several people making claims that have now proved to be totally off-base and those making the accusations have mysteriously disappeared...

My point (if i have one) has been that those who make those dubious claims are the ones trying to make this into a left/right debate because they dont want us discussing the larger picture that implicates all involved in our government. Its distraction from the real issue, which is why the MMS is totally useless because of years of corruption that goes FAR beyond the current resident of the WH.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by justadood]

First of all, if I understand you correctly, you are calling out the people who blame the government for holding back oil skimmers, and in the same breath mention that oil skimmers only cleaned up 3% of the spill.
If that is a correct analysis of your statement, then I have to say you are a walking contridiciton of self.
Would it not make sense that allowing more skimmers and less use of the submergent/dispersant Corexit mean a greater percentage cleaned by said skimmers? Had the government not red taped the Taiwanese super skimmer and had BP used less Corexit, then it would have been on the surface to skim and clean and that percentage would have been vastly increased. If BP had let the Gulf fisher boats work for more than an hour a day, they alone would have done more than 3%.

So, I am either missing your point entirely, or I have posed a logical, albeit opinionated, counterpoint.

I suppose I should add that I am one of those that claimed the government was intentionally holding back both foreign and domestic oil skimmers (opinion as to why not necessarily relevant).

Had they not been witheld in the beginning the oil wouldnt have sunk to the bottom along witht he toxic correxit.

video.yahoo.com...

Where is all the oil? Well check out this report!!!

Originally posted by wheresthetruth
First of all, if I understand you correctly, you are calling out the people who blame the government for holding back oil skimmers, and in the same breath mention that oil skimmers only cleaned up 3% of the spill.
If that is a correct analysis of your statement, then I have to say you are a walking contridiciton of self.
Would it not make sense that allowing more skimmers and less use of the submergent/dispersant Corexit mean a greater percentage cleaned by said skimmers? Had the government not red taped the Taiwanese super skimmer and had BP used less Corexit, then it would have been on the surface to skim and clean and that percentage would have been vastly increased. If BP had let the Gulf fisher boats work for more than an hour a day, they alone would have done more than 3%.

So, I am either missing your point entirely, or I have posed a logical, albeit opinionated, counterpoint.

I suppose I should add that I am one of those that claimed the government was intentionally holding back both foreign and domestic oil skimmers (opinion as to why not necessarily relevant).

Yees. You have missed my point entirely, i believe. Thats okay.

My point was that there was much ado about minor delays to skimmers being part of a concerted effort to stymie clean up efforts. This was bandied about as an example of how Obama hates america, etc. (If you really want, i could google the articles for you, but if youve been here, you must surely remember.)

The point is not that skimmers would help if dispersants werent used. That is a separate issue. I am not speaking on corexittt at all. The point is that these skimmers never were a useful option. the corexitt has been applied from the very beginning. Thus, skimmers were never useful.

The REAL point, though, is that I am bringing this up to point out how those who wish to distract us from whats actually happening always exploit partisan tactics. So, at the moment you have the Right Wing Noise Machine posing questions carefully framed to blame only the "left". This is a distraction. Just as during the past administration
people were able to inject partisan discourse through criticism of only the right.

So, at that moment, you had Fox news (and the like) disseminating these highly partisan 'articles' that have very vague implications meant to take minor beuracratic delays and turn them into an intentional, concerted effort to 'make sure America's gulf is ruined forever', etc. And in this case, as is now is being reported, the skimmers were useless. So any minor delay, or even major or permanent delay would have made essentially no difference. The oil wasnt on the surface to be skimmed.

And then people here, who leap on any sort of accusation like that without actually thinking about a few things like, the bias of the source and the context in which the information would be be read, swallow it whole and immediately call it 'fact'. Now, the event may be fact, but not the interpretation of intent which is packaged as 'fact' and not the opinion it is.


Now, both of these approaches only serve to narrow people's focus to small symptoms of the problem, but not the larger overlying issues. For this specific issue, who is staffed on the MMS, and who has set their policies for at least a decade is a far more real political question. OR why they allowed BP to continue drilling on a well they admitted to having problems with as early as march of this year.

The constant "obama's a communist' tripe that gets bandied about even in this subsection is a distraction. Nonsensical criticism of someone or some thing only serves to dilute the legitimate criticism out here.
Did i succeed iin conveying my point, sir?

Or are you one convinced i work for BP and the Devil and the NWO?

[edit on 5-8-2010 by justadood]

Originally posted by ChocoTaco369
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy

 

Why would this be on the news? It would only further prove the incompetence of the Obama Administration, and since CNN, MSNBC and Oprah got him elected, they have to protect their candidate. If I recall correctly, wasn't BP one of the largest contributors to Obama's presidential run, too? You scratch my back...

THIS. This is the partisan tripe meant to distract from the larger overall failings of our entire Government.

Blaming "Obama" without investigating the individual members of the MMS, Congress, every other politician who took money from BP (on BOTH 'sides' of the isle) is partisan distraction.

Make your assessment more wide in focus and less one-sided, and i will take your assessment more seriously.

As it stands, its suspiciously compartmentalized.