Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,815,033 times
Reputation: 10789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
You're right, we should sit back and let BP fix this mess on its own while our shores are decimated. GREAT idea!

And we're not just talking about cleaning up the mess, but from preventing further damage by stopping the leak and keeping it off the shores.
This is the BEST argument ever for nationalizing oil!!!!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:06 AM
 
214 posts, read 120,308 times
Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
the border thing is different. Jindal seems to be trying to position himself as a heroic little David in the face of a big bad federal Goliath (actually, Goliath's incarnation would be the COAST GUARD). However, there have been practical reasons for the delay. From this,

Experts Express Doubts on Sand-Berm Proposal - NYTimes.com

it appears,

"many experts say it is not at all clear whether dredging companies could build up the barrier islands quickly enough to save the marshes. They are also concerned that the kind of sand berms envisioned in the plan might wash away quickly after a couple of storms, wasting scarce sand in the region."

They all definitely should have been on this long ago, but I dislike this cheap characterization.

As far as being ready for disaster, where has Jindal been all this time?
It would help if you knew the actual truth. As someone pointed out that ACTUALLY lives on the Gulf, this berm idea had been talked about for weeks but the government is dragging their feet with the permits. Jindahl is going forward because the WH is taking too long. So who's fault is it that they might not have enough time? This WH is acting like they WANT it to get worse. Remember Rahm saying "You never let a serious crisis go to waste"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Flyover Country
26,211 posts, read 19,521,305 times
Reputation: 21679
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Jindal isn't waiting on the Fed to approve..he's moving forward to build berms to protect the coast as best they can.

Good for Jindal.

La. won't wait for federal OK to erect sand berms - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100523/ap_on_re_us/us_gulf_oil_spill_barriers - broken link)

"Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal says the state is not waiting for federal approval to begin building sand barriers to protect the coastline from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill."

Yea, you better wait for permission to erect a sand berm....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:11 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,154,953 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuditTheFed View Post
It would help if you knew the actual truth. As someone pointed out that ACTUALLY lives on the Gulf, this berm idea had been talked about for weeks but the government is dragging their feet with the permits. Jindahl is going forward because the WH is taking too long. So who's fault is it that they might not have enough time? This WH is acting like they WANT it to get worse. Remember Rahm saying "You never let a serious crisis go to waste"?
Go back and read the posts and links provided, this is addressed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,326,934 times
Reputation: 2889
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
No kidding, really?
I was referring to your quote pertaining to clean-up:
Quote:
The law was designed to avoid the situation that followed the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, in which the government was left to clean up a private company’s mess and then had to sue the company to recover costs.
I was merely pointing out that this is much more than just a simple clean-up effort.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 09:26 AM
 
214 posts, read 120,308 times
Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Go back and read the posts and links provided, this is addressed.
So then who was delaying it? The WH.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 10:20 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,154,953 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
I was referring to your quote pertaining to clean-up:

I was merely pointing out that this is much more than just a simple clean-up effort.
You seem to be backing up the federal POV
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 10:21 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,154,953 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuditTheFed View Post
So then who was delaying it? The WH.
No, you have to go back and read, Im not going to repost those links for ya
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,326,934 times
Reputation: 2889
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
You seem to be backing up the federal POV
Unless the federal POV entails more than just a "Let's let BP handle this mess", I don't think so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2010, 10:41 AM
 
1,599 posts, read 2,948,186 times
Reputation: 702
There are reasons why the WH has not embraced the idea of using sand berms. It's tempting to want to cheer lead for Jindal, or anyone who is calling for immediate action, but it's not so simple. The Coast Guard, BP executives, ecologists, the Army Corps of Engineers are not convinced that these berms would be helpful and they may compound the problem.

At any rate, there isn't much likelihood that these berms could be built in time, so it could be a loss of money, time and sand, that is in short supply and needed to restore the barrier islands, would be washed away.

I think Jindal sounded good yesterday but I don't think he honestly expressed the possible consequences of using sand berms, nor did he mention that even if the work was started today, it's doubtful they would be successful since they won't be completed in time.


Experts Express Doubts on Sand-Berm Proposal - NYTimes.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:14 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top