Feds Stop Sand Berm Dredging

Unbelievable! It is like no one is running the show at the feds. 

WDSU-TV: NEW ORLEANS -- The federal government is shutting down the dredging that was being done to create protective sand berms in the Gulf of Mexico.

The berms are meant to protect the Louisiana coastline from oil. But the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department has concerns about where the dredging is being done. 

Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser, who was one of the most vocal advocates of the dredging plan, has sent a letter to President Barack Obama, pleading for the work to continue.

Nungesser said the government has asked crews to move the dredging site two more miles farther off the coastline.

"Once again, our government resource agencies, which are intended to protect us, are now leaving us vulnerable to the destruction of our coastline and marshes by the impending oil," Nungesser wrote to Obama. "Furthermore, with the threat of hurricanes or tropical storms, we are being put at an increased risk for devastation to our area from the intrusion of oil.

Nungesser has asked for the dredging to continue for the next seven days, the amount of time it would take to move the dredging operations two miles and out resume work. [MORE] 

This almost seems like some sort of cruel joke. Louisiana goes though all this grief to get the berms built and now that it is well underway some pencil pusher wants it moved because of wildlife concerns? It should be pretty damn obvious that if the coastline is not protected from the oil spill, it won’t make a bit of difference what the environmental impact of the berms are.

This is exactly the kind of thing Obama should be involved in. The fed’s role in this disaster should be that of facilitator and guardian. Obama should be out there cutting though all sorts of red tape so that the clean up and protection efforts can proceed rapidly. His other role should be to safeguard the nation against possible abuses from BP. In both instances he is failing miserably. 

  

Click over to And So it Goes in Shreveport for more.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: WDSU-TV

Video h/t: And So it Goes in Shreveport

Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews Slam Obama’s Oil Spill Speech

The Kool Aid must be wearing off big time! 

Real Clear Politics: Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and Howard Fineman react to President Obama's Oval Office Address on the oil spill. Here are the highlights of what the trio said:

Olbermann: "It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days."

Matthews compared Obama to Carter.

Olbermann: "Nothing specific at all was said."

Matthews: "No direction."

Howard Fineman: "He wasn't specific enough."

Olbermann: "I don't think he aimed low, I don't think he aimed at all. It's startling."

Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a "commander-in-chief."

Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] Chu has a Nobel prize. "I'll barf if he does it one more time."

Matthews: "A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk."

Matthews: "I don't sense executive command." 

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I have not seen all of Obama’s speech, but from what I saw Obama’s solutions seem better suited from what might be done AFTER the oil spill is brought under control rather that how to get the situation under control.   Obama and his administration are still clueless about what the appropriate role for government should be in this situation. There still seems to be this stupid and irresponsible idea to leave BP running the show.

As far as Olberman and Matthews are concern, these two hacks are a day late and a dollar short. Both of these clowns did everything they could to shill for an Obama presidency.  They foolishly believed that a man with no executive experience and no major accomplishments could somehow magically solve the major problems facing America. Now a situation has arisen where you simply cannot fake executive experience and these asses are braying at the moon.

I have little doubt that both Olberman and Matthews will be back to playing their roles as Obama apologists come 2012.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Real Clear Politics

Video h/t: The Right Scoop 

Obama to Politico: Gulf Oil Spill Echoes 9/11

Politico: Sounding reflective as he heads into a bruising electoral season, President Barack Obama told POLITICO columnist Roger Simon that the Gulf disaster “echoes 9/11” because it will change the nation’s psyche for years to come.

Obama — facing mounting criticism of his handling of the BP gusher, even from longtime allies — vowed to make a “bold” push for a new energy law even as the calamity continues to unfold. And he said he will use the rest of his presidency to try to put the United States on a course toward a “new way of doing business when it comes to energy.”

“In the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11,” the president said in an Oval Office interview on Friday, "I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come.”

My first thought was, Dear Lord, may we never experience another 9/11 under Obama’s incompetence.  My second thought was just how unrelated the two events are. 9/11 was an act of war and the BP oil spill is a disaster being made worse by incompetent management. I think it is fair to say that Obama himself doesn’t believe a word of what he is saying. Otherwise why spend the rest of the day golfing? 

Of course Obama is going to use the oil spill to pass that nightmare legislation Cap and Tax: 

In his firmest declaration yet that he views the calamity as an impetus to push Congress afresh to pass a major energy and climate bill, Obama vowed to “move forward in a bold way in a direction that finally gives us the kind of future-oriented, … visionary energy policy that we so vitally need and has been absent for so long..”

“One of the biggest leadership challenges for me going forward is going to be to make sure that we draw the right lessons from this disaster,” he said.

It most certainly will be a leadership challenge to draw lessons from a disaster that still isn’t resolved yet. Never the less, Obama is pushing for a piece of legislation from way back during the campaign to solve the problems of today.  

When reading this story I had third and more frightening thought.  Obama has over two years to go in his term. In that time there remains the possibility for yet another disaster that he will no doubt be ill equip to handle.  Too bad these disasters aren’t unorganized communities; perhaps then Obama would have a clue.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Politico

Via: Gateway Pundit

WTF?!? CNN: Obama cannot get angry because he is a black man?

Good Lord Almighty! The Raaaaacism Industrial Complex has gone into overdrive. Check out this hot mess from John Blake at CNN: 

Here's proof that President Obama has indeed ushered in a new era in race relations.

Who would have ever expected some white Americans to demand that an African-American man show more rage?

If you've followed the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, you've heard the complaints that Obama isn't showing enough emotion.

But scholars say Obama's critics ignore a lesson from American history: Many white Americans don't like angry black men.

It's the lesson Obama absorbed from his upbringing, and from an impromptu remark he delivered last summer. Yet it's a lesson he may now have to jettison, they say, as public outrage spreads.

"Folks are waiting for a Samuel Jackson 'Snakes on the Plane' moment from this president as in: 'We gotta' get this $#@!!* oil back in the $#!!* rig!' But that's just not who Obama is,'' says Saladin Ambar, a political science professor at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Some of the same people crying for Obama to show more emotion would have voted against him if he had displayed anger during his presidential run, says William Jelani Cobb, author of "The Substance of Hope: Barack Obama and the Paradox of Progress."

"It would have fed deeply into a pre-existing set of narratives about the angry black man," Cobb says. "The anger would have gotten in the way. He would have frightened off white voters who were interested in him because he seemed to be like the black guy they worked with or went to graduate school with -- not a black guy who is threatening." [MORE]

You must be kidding me. I cannot believe Blake is trying to use racism as an excuse for Obama’s failings. I am telling you; at this rate the old race card will be in tatters by 2012.

This “angry black man” argument doesn’t hold water for a minute. First of all, I would imagine that any white person who gets freaked out at the sight of an "angry black man", probably did not vote for Obama in 2008 and probably won’t come 2012. So why should Obama even be concerned about offending them? 

Secondly, I still don’t understand why the left is insisting on Obama showing emotion over the oil spill. What the situation calls for is competence not emotion.  We are more than 50 days from the start of this disaster, yet people in the Gulf are still asking for the basics to protect their shores and BP is still playing games with information on the size and scope of the spill. This is the result of Obama’s incompetent managing of the situation and not the result of his lack of emotion.

If I was a white person and I read Blake’s article or saw the segment below my days of watching CNN would be soooo over.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: CNN

It’s the inexperience stupid: Why Obama hasn’t met with BP’s CEO

Yesterday on the Today show, Obama sat down with Matt Laurer and was asked about why he has not yet spoken to BP CEO Tony Hayward. Check out the 2:35 mark.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Gateway Pundit reminds us why this answer doesn’t seem to make much sense.

Barack Obama unabashedly announced during the 2008 Campaign that he would be willing to meet with the world’s worst dictators including the Iranian Preisident Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez from Venezuela and Kim Jong Il from North Korea in his first year in office “without preconditions.”

Lets see if we can get this straight. Obama won’t meet with Hayward because he knows Hayward is going to blow smoke up his ass. However Obama will meet with Iran despite the fact that they have been blowing smoke up everyone’s ass for decades.  It just doesn’t make sense. I think the real reason why Obama has not met with Hayward is because of inexperience. Obama simply did not think to do it. Remember this is the very first executive position Obama has ever held. He has never run a business, a city or a state.  All Obama has run up until now is his mouth.

Sarah Palin in her latest Facebook note sees Obama’s lack of experience and the media’s failure to notice it. 

50 days in, and we’ve just learned another shocking revelation concerning the Obama administration’s response to the Gulf oil spill. In an interview aired this morning, President Obama admitted that he hasn’t met with or spoken directly to BP’s CEO Tony Hayward. Hisreasoning: “Because my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he’s gonna say all the right things to me. I’m not interested in words. I’m interested in actions.”

First, to the “informed and enlightened” mainstream media: in all the discussions you’ve had with the White House about the spill, did it not occur to you before today to ask how the CEO-to-CEO level discussions were progressing to remedy this tragedy? You never cease to amaze. (Kind of reminds us of the months on end when you never bothered to ask if the President wasmeeting with General McChrystal to talk about our strategy in Afghanistan.)

Second, to fellow baffled Americans: this revelation is further proof that it bodes well to havesome sort of executive experience before occupying the Oval Office (as if the painfully slow response to the oil spill, confusion of duties, finger-pointing, lack of preparedness, and inability to grant local government simple requests weren’t proof enough). The current administration may be unaware that it’s the President’s duty, meeting on a CEO-to-CEO level with Hayward, to verify what BP reports. In an interview a few weeks ago with Greta Van Susteren, I noted that based on my experience working with oil execs as an oil regulator and then as a Governor, you must verify what the oil companies claim – because their perception of circumstances and situations dealing with public resources and public trust is not necessarily shared by those who own America’s public resources and trust. I was about run out of town in Alaska for what critics decried at the time as my “playing hardball with Big Oil,” and those same adversaries (both shortsighted Repubs and Dems) continue to this day to try to discredit my administration’s efforts in holding Big Oil accountable to operate ethically and responsibly. [MORE]

What I also find odd about Obama’s refusal to meet with Hayward is that BP’s handling of the spill has the potential to totally sink Obama’s presidency. Just look at how BP’s slow response and failed efforts are drawing focus on Obama’s performance. What if BP takes another 50 days or more to “plug the damn hole”? If I were Obama, Hayward’s private cell phone number would be #1 on speed dial on my presidential BlackBerry until this nightmare was over.

I believe that Obama’s original thought was to dump the whole mess in BP’s lap and simply play the blame game. It never dawned on Obama that people would expect him to get involved. Obama has been ducking responsibility from day one. He outsourced the stimulus, he outsourced Cap and Trade and he outsourced ObamaCare. All have ended up being a hot mess.

The oil spill has force Obama to finally get personally involved. He is going to have to take an active role in the crisis and the results of his effort will define his presidency.

Via: Memeorandum

Video h/t: Hot Air

Via: Gateway Pundit

Via: Sarah Palin’s Facebook Page 

Obama is looking to kick someone’s ass

 

CNN: President Barack Obama bluntly defended his administration's response to the undersea gusher fouling the Gulf of Mexico on Monday, telling an interviewer he has met with experts to learn "whose ass to kick."

"I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf," Obama told NBC's "Today" show in an interview scheduled to air Tuesday. "A month ago I was meeting with fishermen down there, standing in the rain talking about what a potential crisis this could be."

A variety of critics have accused Obama of being too cerebral in his reaction to the undersea gusher now fouling the Gulf of Mexico, of failing to put the full force of the administration and of putting too much trust in oil company BP. But Obama told NBC his deliberations have been more than academic.

"I don't sit around talking to experts because this is a college seminar," Obama continued. "We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick." 

Oh brother! This little sound bite was designed to calm the grumbling from lefties like Maureen Dowd, Bill Maher and Spike Lee. It won’t calm real people from fuming over the oil spill. Right now people are not interested in seeing Obama go after the guilty parties. Right now people want to see the oil spill brought under some sort of control. From capping the spill to cleaning up the mess, there still seems to be this scatterbrained approach to handling the crisis by both BP and the administration.

Right now, kicking the ass of BP and who ever else is culpable is not going to save any beaches, any wildlife or anyone’s livelihood. The only thing that can save those things is competent management and competent management seems to be above Obama’s pay grade.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: CNN

Video h/t: Gateway Pundit

Via: The New York Times

Via: The New York Post
Via: ABC News

Quick notes: Obama’s press conference on the oil spill in the Gulf

Obama held a press conference for the first time since I don’t know when. Basically, he used BP’s, so far successful, top kill method to address the Gulf Oil Spill. The press conference was typical Obama. While accepting blame, Obama also did everything he could to rhetorically pass the buck. 

The American people should know that from the moment this disaster began, the federal government has been in charge of the response effort. As far as I’m concerned, BP is responsible for this horrific disaster, and we will hold them fully accountable on behalf of the United States as well as the people and communities victimized by this tragedy. We will demand that they pay every dime they owe for the damage they’ve done and the painful losses that they’ve caused. And we will continue to take full advantage of the unique technology and expertise they have to help stop this leak. 

This is BS of the first order.  The Federal government was clearly AWOL on this disaster. The Obama administration tried to dump the whole thing in BP’s lap, so that it could stand by and with clean hands and demonize BP for political points. 

Sarah Palin questions this notion of the government being there on day one in her latest Facebook note: 

If the President really was fully focused on this issue from day one, why did it take nine whole days before the administration asked the Department of Defense for help in deploying equipment needed for the extreme depth spill site?

Why was the expert group assembled by Energy Commissioner Steven Chu only set up three weeks after the start of this disaster?

Why was Governor Jindal forced more than a month after the start of the disaster to go on national television to beg for materials needed to tackle the oil spill and for federal approval to build offshore sand barriers that are imperative to protect his state’s coastline?

Why was no mention of the spill made by our President for days on end while Americans waited to hear if he grasped the import of his leadership on this energy issue?

Why have several countries and competent organizations who offered help or expertise in dealing with the spill not even received a response back from the Unified Area Command to this day? 

Obama should have made sure that the fed was playing two roles throughout the spill. The government should have acted as both guardian and facilitator. As a guardian, the government should have kept a close eye on BP’s activities to make sure the nation’s best interests were being served. As a facilitator, the Obama should have been cutting through red tape to expedite both BP’s efforts and the clean up efforts (e.g. Bobby Jindal’s requests).

Here is where Obama does the classic passing of the blame. Of course the blame is passed to the administration’s handy dandy scapegoat the Bush administration (this time through inference). 

In recent months, I’ve spoken about the dangers of too much -- I’ve heard people speaking about the dangers of too much government regulation. And I think we can all acknowledge there have been times in history when the government has overreached. But in this instance, the oil industry’s cozy and sometimes corrupt relationship with government regulators meant little or no regulation at all.

When Secretary Salazar took office, he found a Minerals and Management Service that had been plagued by corruption for years –- this was the agency charged with not only providing permits, but also enforcing laws governing oil drilling. And the corruption was underscored by a recent Inspector General’s report that covered activity which occurred prior to 2007 -- a report that can only be described as appalling. And Secretary Salazar immediately took steps to clean up that corruption. But this oil spill has made clear that more reforms are needed. 

Well with almost a year and a half of this administration, why hasn’t the cozy and corrupt relationship between the oil industry and government regulators ended? If they can identify it, why couldn’t they correct it?

Again Sarah Palin, point out the flaws in this argument:

He suggested today that a “culture of corruption” at the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) was solely the previous administration’s responsibility and that the failure of the inspection system was a failure of that administration. That is false. The MMS has been his responsibility since January 20, 2009. 

The MMS director who resigned today, Elizabeth Birnbaum, was appointed by his administration. And the most recent inspection of the oil rig took place a mere 10 days before the explosion –also very much on his watch, not President Bush’s. 

All in all, this press conference did not do Obama any favors. What Americans are looking for now is action not rhetoric. If Obama wants to escape the Katrina analogy, then he has to make sure he and the administration stays deeply involved in the clean up process. Simply giving his speech and then walking away will not do.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: White House. Gov

Via: Sarah Palin’s Facebook notes

Good News: Top Kill method appears to be working

Here is some much-needed good news concerning the oil spill in the Gulf. 

LA Times: Officials are cautionary but say drilling fluid has blocked oil and gas temporarily. Engineers plan to begin pumping in cement and then will seal the well.

Reporting from Houma, La. —

Engineers have at least temporarily stopped the flow of oil and gas into the Gulf of Mexico from a gushing BP well, the federal government's top oil-spill commander, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, said Thursday morning.

The "top kill" effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, had pumped enough drilling fluid to block oil and gas spewing from the well, Allen said. The pressure from the well was very low, he said, but persisting. The top kill effort is not complete, officials caution.

Once engineers had reduced the well pressure to zero, they were to begin pumping cement into the hole to entomb the well. To help in that effort, he said, engineers also were pumping some debris into the blowout preventer at the top of the well.

As of early Thursday morning, neither government nor BP officials had declared the effort a success yet, pending the completion of the cementing and sealing of the well.

Let’s keep our fingers crossed that this method proves fully successful.  Now that things are looking like they are getting under control, heads are starting to roll.

Michelle Malkin: News leaking ahead of President Obama’s scheduled 12:45pm Eastern press conference today: the first head has been delivered.

Via AP:

Democratic sources say the Obama administration has fired the head of the U.S. Minerals Management Service in response to blistering criticism over lax oversight of offshore drilling.

The sources, speaking on condition of anonymity before the official announcement, tell The Associated Press that President Barack Obama will announce the decision Thursday. 

Given how terribly this spill has been handled, I would expect a long list of heads to roll from both BP and the government. Let’s see if Obama will start thinning the herd of incompetents and throw Ken Salazar out the door.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The LA Times

Via: Michelle Malkin 

Sarah Palin questions BP’s contributions to Obama

Yesterday Sarah Palin caused quite a stir on Fox News Sunday when Chris Wallace asked her about the BP oil spill. Palin questioned why the media wasn’t asking if Obama being the top recipient of BP cash has anything to do with his slow response to the spill. 

WALLACE: Governor, I want to pick up on the point that you just made, which is that you did, as governor of Alaska, go after oil companies, including B.P. in several cases. How do you think the Obama administration has handled the oil spill so far?

PALIN: Well, I think that there is perhaps a hesitancy to — I don’t really know how to put this, Chris, except to say that the oil companies who have so supported President Obama in his campaign and are supportive of him now — I don’t know why the question isn’t asked by the mainstream media and by others if there’s any connection with the contributions made to President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration.

If there’s any connection there to President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico — now, if this was President Bush or if this were a Republican in office who hadn’t received as much support even as President Obama has from B.P. and other oil companies, you know the mainstream media would be all over his case in terms of asking questions why the administration didn’t get in there, didn’t get in there and make sure that the regulatory agencies were doing what they were doing with the oversight to make sure that things like this don’t happen.

Of course, whenever Palin makes a solid knock on the administration they are quick to respond. While on CBS' Face The Nation, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked about Palin’s remarks. He did not hesistate to try to belittle her. 

"Sarah Palin was involved in that election, but I don't think, apparently, was paying a whole lot of attention," Gibbs said.

"I'm almost sure that the oil companies don't consider the Obama administration a huge ally. We proposed awindfall profits tax when they jacked their oil prices up to charge for gasoline.

"My suggestion to Sarah Palin would be to get slightly more informed as to what's going on in and around oil drilling in this country." 

Palin was not about to let Gibbs get the best of her. Just like when Obama tried to belittle her, Palin fired back harder, this time on Twitter 

Mr. Gibbs, BP gave over $3.5mill to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest amount going to Obamahttp://u.nu/5vpia about 15 hours ago via web

Mr. Gibbs, Obama is the top recipient of BP PAC & individual money over the past 20 years. http://u.nu/5vpia Dispute these facts.about 15 hours ago via web 

I am sure Doughboy Gibbs will have some slippery answer as to why we should not question BP’s contributions to Obama. I am also sure the media will have some lame reason why they won't look any further.

Below is the full clip of Palin’s appearance on Fox News Sunday. Palin’s Rand Paul remarks are making a buzz too.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Fox News Sunday

Via: Agence France Presse

Via: Sarah Palin on Twitter

Some thoughts on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Ten days ago when the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded it appeared that not many were concerned about the possibility of a massive oil spill like the one we are seeing today. I found it odd, that there seemed to be far less preparation for such an event. Time will tell if the administration and BP acted appropriately. For now, we are staring at an environmental nightmare.

As the oil spill starts to reach the Louisiana coast, we are just beginning to realize what kind of impact this spill will have on the wildlife, ecosystems and the economy of that region. Of course the anti-domestic drilling forces will, for the short term, score a tremendous victory. How can they not? With each passing day, week and month we will see the physical evidence of the risks to offshore drilling. This spill has the potential to make the Exxon Valdez spill look like a mud puddle.

This is why I find it pretty brave for Sarah Palin to step up and continue her mantra of drill baby, drill. Already, the left is beginning to mock her for her continued push for domestic drilling. It is a very easy thing to do when the evidence is currently on their side. However, there are some powerful truths to Palin’s argument. 

Alaskans understand the tragedy of an oil spill, and we’ve taken steps to do all we can to prevent another Exxon tragedy, but we are still pro-development. We still believe in responsible development, which includes drilling to extract energy sources, because we know that there is an inherent link between energy and security, energy and prosperity, and energy and freedom. Production of our own resources means security for America and opportunities for American workers. We need oil, and if we don’t drill for it here, we have to purchase it from countries that not only do not like America and can use energy purchases as a weapon against us, but also do not have the oversight that America has. 

We need the oil! This is the unshakeable truth we should not lose sight of as the whole Deepwater Horizon fiasco unfolds. Yes, there are real risks to offshore drilling. No one can deny that now, but we must not deny the fact that even if a new energy source was discovered today, it would be decades before that new energy source can fully replace oil, until then oil is what we need. We can continue to delude ourselves that buying oiling from dangerous regimes won’t backfire on us someday. We can continue to delude ourselves that that our national debt is not at the breaking point and we can afford wild fluctuations in oil prices. We can continue to delude ourselves that letting less developed nations irresponsibly extract oil for us is somehow saving the planet. Or we can put our emotions in check and face the stark realities before us. We need the oil.

So as the Deepwater Horizon nightmare unfolds, let us suppress the obvious emotional responses to the devastation. Instead let us go forward with clear thinking and a true understanding of our economic and political realities. We can learn from this fiasco how to make offshore drilling safer. We can learn from the fiasco how better to protect our environment from such accidents. We can learn from this fiasco our energy needs come with risks. The current economic and political realities of our energy situation leave us little choice.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The New York Times

Via: Sarah Palin’s Facebook Page

Via: Rachel Maddow