This is a question that your starting to hear more and more on TV and talk radio the last few days. Myself, i'm not going to go so far to say that it is Obama's Katrina. The people saying that it is his Katrina make points in that it does seem like the response to the building crisis has been a bit on the slow side. Most of the blame for the incident should definitely go to BP first being that it was their rig. The Navy and Coast Guard were indeed at the rig soon after the explosion which was good too... although seriously, I don't think that anyone was going to let a burning oil rig just burn out of control, of course they were going to show up. It would appear that the administration might of taken BP's word for it so to speak as to how much oil was actually leaking and might of failed in not getting confirmation of the fact. Depending on how the oil spill ends up affecting the coastline in the several states that could be affected will determine who's "Katrina" the oil spill ends up being... will either be BP's or Obama's.

This story is from USA Today...........

Obama, Katrina and the oil slick

Want to annoy officials in President Obama's White House? Suggest comparing its response to the Gulf Coast oil spill with the George W. Bush administration's response to Hurricane Katrina.

"Other than geography, I can't figure out how," press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters yesterday.

Of course, that hasn't stopped assorted Obama critics from trying, citing the timeline. An oil rig operated by British Petroleum blew up April 20; three days later, the U.S. Coast Guard said there no oil leak -- and had to amend that statement a day later. Now a massive environmental disaster looms.

"This incident occurred on April the 20th," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind. "It really wasn't until April the 28th until the administration fully deployed federal resources."

In their public comments, Obama and his aides have stressed their responsiveness to an evolving and unexpected challenge.

"The federal government has launched and coordinated an all-hands-on-deck, relentless response to this crisis from day one," Obama said.

Our friends at Politico noted that Cabinet members used the phrase "day one" at least 16 times during a string of Sunday talk show appearances.

Speaking with reporters yesterday, Gibbs said he's "happy to compare the response" to Katrina:

We're obviously dealing with a situation of great potential environmental and economic devastation. I think the analogies, though, are tougher to make (with) a storm that you track for several weeks that comes ashore and kills 1,800 people. ... The timeline I was looking at this morning had the Coast Guard and the Navy there on site immediately after this explosion.

We've done everything that we could.

(Posted by David Jackson)

Views: 35

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hmmm, guess I expected this subject to come up much sooner, almost started a discussion myself for a few days. Word has it Obama slept on this one, big time. To add insult to injury, he has made two important deployments to the scene for help: 1) swat teams and 2) justice dept. attorneys. WTH???????? Swat teams to do what? Keep the public cool as their shoreline becomes totally unusable and destroyed in a few days? Attorneys? for what? To decide whom bears the most blame and who to sue and for how much? Mr. President! Take time from your busy schedule of defending the health bill, running Wall Street down, running the Az. immigration bill down, making speeches overseas and at colleges for the graduates, and amuch to do about nothing, and get this oil spill catastrophy on the top of the to do list asap. It's just the biggest oil spill in history, and getting bigger everyday. Over 250,000 gallons of crude spilling into the ocean everyday or more. Now it's coming to the shorelines, destroying oyster beds, shrimping areas, etc. the list is over 4,000 species of plankton/fish/crustaceons/wildlife are at stake. Doesn't that bode as a true environmental and economic emergency? If not, what the heck does?
Putting this on Obama is retarded. What does he have to do with it anyway. Nothing.

There should be procedures to follow when things happen and all somebody needs to do is follow them. It is up to BP to get the crews out there and pay them for it. Not the president. Why should this be the presidents problem?

Making it his problem is like saying if aqua's boat sinks it is my fault for getting the salvage crew up and running slowing. It isn't my boat so why would it be my problem, Same with BO and BP.

It isn'y like it was BO's personal oil rig, but it was BP's.

If we blame anyone lets put it on the idiots that allow or support oil drilling in the first place(re Halliburton_owned by>Cheney_built rig under>Bush.)

BTW, i think BO and Bush are equal in the idiot category. I a smarter than BOTH of them. hehehehe
Louisiana politics at the local (New Orleans, esp.) and state level should have had procedures in place for just such an emergency (Katrina), because it was just a matter of when a high category hurricane would hit the shores there. Emergency procedures/guidelines were not in place or followed in Louisiana at the time.

Their incompetence made it more difficult for FEMA, or GWB, to intervene efficiently. I respect GWB for shouldering the blame for the government's reaction, and would respect similarly strong shoulders from Obama if this isn't handled correctly. IMHO, BHO and GWB really should not be held responsible unless they hinder progress in emergency situations.
I never said Mr. Prez. is responsible for the spill, that wuld be dum. What I did say is the aftermath of such a tragedy is descending upon the US's shoreline. That's where the responsibility must begin, along with the affected states whose shorelines are going to receive a massive invasion of oil upon it's beaches and wildlife. BP is the ultimate and final party responsible, also for clean up and fines. But, what does this say about FEMA, EPA, Interior, State, and Energy Depts. that are watchdogging such instances? If they aren't in part responsible to try to offset the extent of damages, try to circumvent the far-reaching potential damages, in cooperation with BP, then we don't need to fund these agencies any longer imho.
Part of the problem with the oil slick situation is that whoever should of been prepared for it, wasn't. I keep hearing about some of the specialty booms.. the fire booms I think.. that there was only 1 available and it was in Chicago. Like X mentioned, a oil spill wasn't a 'it it happens' sort of thing, it was a 'when it happens' sort of thing. Like with Katrina, the procedures set up were either not followed or started to late to do any good. Somewhere along the Gulf Coast, there should of been at least a couple locations where a good supply of the different booms could be stored in case of a spill so that they could of been on scene in hours or a few days at most.
Btw, who's to say this so-called accident isn't an act of terrorists? Where's Homeland Security? Aren't they the least bit concerned in investigating for the sake of security? NOW, another CRISIS is at hand! Seems an oil refinery owned by AGE, whoever that is, had a serious explosion TODAY near San Antonio too. Is it coiincidence or another RELATED ACT OF TERRORISTS? This fire is also out of control at the moment. I can see and hear two serious crisis's right now in the gulf of mx. on our shores. All the libs. complain to this day W. didn't do anything regarding Katrina. What's the dif. with Obama? Except that W. was on the scene in 2 days, Obama 9 days, and still no affirmative constructive actions.


© 2018   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service