Obama Grants BP Exemption
05-27-2010, 04:17 PM
#1
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obama administration gave BP an exemption from enviornmental compliance standards a year before and 11 days before the oil rig exploded. What a shame.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...050404118.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...050404118.html
05-28-2010, 07:38 AM
#4
Contributors
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-28-2010, 08:03 AM
#5
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Really?
- in early 2001 (not wasting any time), new incentives were provided for shallow water producers (i.e. something easier to do). Gale Horton did put a threshhold limit, but it was then seen as an extremely high prices (5$/mbtu limit, compared to the 2-3$/mbtu wholesale price then prevalent in the North American market). And in 2004, when gas prices had increased, the threshhold level was also increased, to an extravagant 9.34$/mbtu;
- in 2003, the oil industry successfully sued the administration about an interpretation of the law: the volume limit was deemed to apply per lease, and not per hydrocarbon field. Knowing that you typically have 3 leases per field, that decision immediately tripled the cost in lost royalties. Now the Bush administration cannot be blamed for the poorly worded 1995 law, but it then did nothing to change it
As I have said, no matter who we elect nothing really changes. All politicians are whores for lobbyists, irregardless of party affiliation.
- in 2003, the oil industry successfully sued the administration about an interpretation of the law: the volume limit was deemed to apply per lease, and not per hydrocarbon field. Knowing that you typically have 3 leases per field, that decision immediately tripled the cost in lost royalties. Now the Bush administration cannot be blamed for the poorly worded 1995 law, but it then did nothing to change it
As I have said, no matter who we elect nothing really changes. All politicians are whores for lobbyists, irregardless of party affiliation.
05-28-2010, 08:16 AM
#6
Contributors
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NYC & LI
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah thats the point, this was supposed to be a new era and its just politics as usual. This president will go down as nothing special other than his mixed heritage. The left and the right are equal in their greed and contempt for the American people and its no excuse to say that the right does it too or did the same in the past, this was supposed to be the Left march to equality for all, not just another version of the so called right.
If you heard the president yesterday it was laughable at his remarks as to who is in control, its definitely not him nor his administration. Why isnt anyone screaming to ask why it took more than 5 weeks to execute this 'top kill'??? This disaster is already estimated conservatively (no pun) as twice as much oil as the Exxon Valdez, to a worse case scenerio of perhaps nearly 4 times as much oil spilled. If this top kill works, and we all should be praying that it does, why didnt we do this week 1 or week 2 or week 3? Perhaps the admin was protecting BP as its large contributor that they are, and they were trying to still save the WELL! That is the only reason that can be inferred. They were trying to save their investment and the oil with all that bs to try syphin the oil to a ship above. They wasted weeks with that BS while the oil was flowing 24/7 at massively underestimated volumes and destroying our coastline and untold peoples lives. They could have done this after they put out the fire and saved the crew but they didnt and the President needs to answer for that.
If you heard the president yesterday it was laughable at his remarks as to who is in control, its definitely not him nor his administration. Why isnt anyone screaming to ask why it took more than 5 weeks to execute this 'top kill'??? This disaster is already estimated conservatively (no pun) as twice as much oil as the Exxon Valdez, to a worse case scenerio of perhaps nearly 4 times as much oil spilled. If this top kill works, and we all should be praying that it does, why didnt we do this week 1 or week 2 or week 3? Perhaps the admin was protecting BP as its large contributor that they are, and they were trying to still save the WELL! That is the only reason that can be inferred. They were trying to save their investment and the oil with all that bs to try syphin the oil to a ship above. They wasted weeks with that BS while the oil was flowing 24/7 at massively underestimated volumes and destroying our coastline and untold peoples lives. They could have done this after they put out the fire and saved the crew but they didnt and the President needs to answer for that.
05-28-2010, 08:28 AM
#7
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
yeah thats the point, this was supposed to be a new era and its just politics as usual. This president will go down as nothing special other than his mixed heritage. The left and the right are equal in their greed and contempt for the American people and its no excuse to say that the right does it too or did the same in the past, this was supposed to be the Left march to equality for all, not just another version of the so called right.
If you heard the president yesterday it was laughable at his remarks as to who is in control, its definitely not him nor his administration. Why isnt anyone screaming to ask why it took more than 5 weeks to execute this 'top kill'??? This disaster is already estimated conservatively (no pun) as twice as much oil as the Exxon Valdez, to a worse case scenerio of perhaps nearly 4 times as much oil spilled. If this top kill works, and we all should be praying that it does, why didnt we do this week 1 or week 2 or week 3? Perhaps the admin was protecting BP as its large contributor that they are, and they were trying to still save the WELL! That is the only reason that can be inferred. They were trying to save their investment and the oil with all that bs to try syphin the oil to a ship above. They wasted weeks with that BS while the oil was flowing 24/7 at massively underestimated volumes and destroying our coastline and untold peoples lives. They could have done this after they put out the fire and saved the crew but they didnt and the President needs to answer for that.
If you heard the president yesterday it was laughable at his remarks as to who is in control, its definitely not him nor his administration. Why isnt anyone screaming to ask why it took more than 5 weeks to execute this 'top kill'??? This disaster is already estimated conservatively (no pun) as twice as much oil as the Exxon Valdez, to a worse case scenerio of perhaps nearly 4 times as much oil spilled. If this top kill works, and we all should be praying that it does, why didnt we do this week 1 or week 2 or week 3? Perhaps the admin was protecting BP as its large contributor that they are, and they were trying to still save the WELL! That is the only reason that can be inferred. They were trying to save their investment and the oil with all that bs to try syphin the oil to a ship above. They wasted weeks with that BS while the oil was flowing 24/7 at massively underestimated volumes and destroying our coastline and untold peoples lives. They could have done this after they put out the fire and saved the crew but they didnt and the President needs to answer for that.
Basically agree with everything you said. BP should be held COMPLETELY accountable for the disaster and the damage caused to the shores of the Gulf States. This is ridiculous.
The problem is that since lobbying is so strong, nothing will probably be done to them. They have BOTH Dems and Reps in their pockets, they contribute heavily to whichever candidate appears most likely to win.
FINALLY!!!!
05-28-2010, 08:41 AM
#8
Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really?
- in early 2001 (not wasting any time), new incentives were provided for shallow water producers (i.e. something easier to do). Gale Horton did put a threshhold limit, but it was then seen as an extremely high prices (5$/mbtu limit, compared to the 2-3$/mbtu wholesale price then prevalent in the North American market). And in 2004, when gas prices had increased, the threshhold level was also increased, to an extravagant 9.34$/mbtu;
- in 2003, the oil industry successfully sued the administration about an interpretation of the law: the volume limit was deemed to apply per lease, and not per hydrocarbon field. Knowing that you typically have 3 leases per field, that decision immediately tripled the cost in lost royalties. Now the Bush administration cannot be blamed for the poorly worded 1995 law, but it then did nothing to change it
As I have said, no matter who we elect nothing really changes. All politicians are whores for lobbyists, irregardless of party affiliation.
- in early 2001 (not wasting any time), new incentives were provided for shallow water producers (i.e. something easier to do). Gale Horton did put a threshhold limit, but it was then seen as an extremely high prices (5$/mbtu limit, compared to the 2-3$/mbtu wholesale price then prevalent in the North American market). And in 2004, when gas prices had increased, the threshhold level was also increased, to an extravagant 9.34$/mbtu;
- in 2003, the oil industry successfully sued the administration about an interpretation of the law: the volume limit was deemed to apply per lease, and not per hydrocarbon field. Knowing that you typically have 3 leases per field, that decision immediately tripled the cost in lost royalties. Now the Bush administration cannot be blamed for the poorly worded 1995 law, but it then did nothing to change it
As I have said, no matter who we elect nothing really changes. All politicians are whores for lobbyists, irregardless of party affiliation.
05-28-2010, 08:51 AM
#9
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Interesting how the leftwing refuses to criticize Obama for granting BP the Exemption but immediately starts to criticize Bush. And although the writer should have known that lefty Bill Clinton signed that 1995 law- he couldn't bring himself to say it but rather had to mention Bush. Wow! The liberal bias is so strong it sure clouds one's vision, doesn't it?
Are you literate? Really? Do you read the whole post? What was left leaning about that posting? When the general theme was: The more things change the more they stay the same. Please step into the real world Greg, reality called - it's for you
05-28-2010, 12:26 PM
#10
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 18,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: F02 LCI Individual
Model Year: 2013
