I have a question for DUers

[malaise]

BP was clearly giving out incorrect numbers but were the Coast Guard officials in collusion with BP and lying to the WH?

[DJ13]

1. and lying to the WH?

Or were they aware of the lying as well?

From a PR perspective they didnt really want a bigger amount being talked about either.

[malaise]

5. Who knows although my rational side tells me

that BP knows more than everyone else and continues to LIE

[secondwind]

2. who's to say? The Coast Guard didn't go down 5,000 feet to check, and they don't

have the technology to check, IMHO. Same for the WH. We (the WH) relied on BP's information and accepted it as fact. In the beginning.

[malaise]

4. That's my basic view but I am curious about links between

still in place Bushco administrators and corporations.

[Oregone]

3. No. The Coast Guard is part of the government

And the government is infallible when a Democrat is in office

[malaise]

6. Supposed to be infallible when Democrats

are in office

[Lone_Star_Dem]

8. Never infallible.

It's still run by very imperfect humans. Always, no matter what.

[Blue-Jay]

14. Who has suggested that?

Or is you current state of frustration making you exaggerate a wee tiny bit?

[Oregone]

16. Everytime I go into GDP, Im convinced of the infallible nature of Democratic administrations

No matter what the task, they can make no error. Any error is do to my misunderstanding of the global 3 dimensional chess board I must have faith in.

[Blue-Jay]

18. I've seen a lot of back & forth bullshit, but nothing like you describe.

Oh well. Perception is reality I guess.

[Oregone]

19. Example regarding this disaster: "He's doing everything possible"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=330477#330585

He is therefore infallible on this disaster (by doing everything possible in his power), just as he was on health care and the stimulus bill too. Needs quotes for those also? :) Nevermind. I have a slight life.

[Blue-Jay]

21. I'm going to agree with you. (with a caveat)

I don't think that he's doing "everything possible", but I don't know what is possible. I'm not a deep-rig scientist, so I don't really know which courses of action are are possible. I'm not qualified to make that sort of assessment. I don't have any expert scientists that I can consult to educate me.

I've recently learned more about deep water drilling than I ever wanted to learn. That said, I have no idea how the current administration can be faulted at this point. This oil gusher is a brand new thing, and I lay the blame firmly on the Cheney administration with his secret meetings with big oil with the intention of making as much money as possible. This could have been avoided had not the previous fuckheads been given the go-ahead for oil conglomerates to save money by forgoing safety.

Back to the subject:

Nobody with an IQ higher than that of a potato has declared Obama as "infallible". Only our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ can claim that. (OK.... I just typed that sentence for comic relief - I'm an atheist).

I really don't know for a fact who can do what. We're all on the same side (actual DUers, not fake Duers).

Here's the rub.

When you have a mindset that Obama can do no wrong, then your opinion is Not Worth Shit.
When you have a mindset that Obama does everything wrong, then your opinion is Not Worth Shit.

[Oregone]

22. I don't know either, to be honest

But as long as I see but a picture of a single drop of oil that a potential government employee could skim off the ocean easily to prevent further harm, Id have to say its not *everything* possible. And there are a lot of those pictures at the moment.


"Nobody with an IQ higher than that of a potato has declared Obama as "infallible""

No. But by defending every action as the best action to produce the best of all possible worlds, they definitely imply it. I merely use the word to paraphrase this sentiment and point out this group-think behavior that people should be very wary of. Obama has done a great to mediocre to unsatisfactory job on a variety of subjects, but to some people in GDP, each and everything fits a larger chess board they cannot see, but believe is there and being followed by Obama. Thats absurd. I probably come off as an Obama critic by merely being a critic of this particular mindset. There is always room for improvement in any worthy human endeavor, no matter how great one's course may in fact be.


"When you have a mindset that Obama can do no wrong, then your opinion is Not Worth Shit.
When you have a mindset that Obama does everything wrong, then your opinion is Not Worth Shit."

I could not agree more

[Blue-Jay]

27. I like this! We're having a discussion!

:pals:

It's not an "all or nothing" issue. At least I don't think so. Only the Dallas Cowboys are either "love 'em" or "hate 'em". (Did you ever notice that? No football fan is ever indifferent about the Dallas Cowboys - but I digress)

As far as being an "Obama critic", I get it. I want us to get the fuck out of Afghanistan and Iraq right fucking now. (although, I wouldn't be too opposed to keeping a fortified embassy in either place, provided the respective governments wanted that.)

I would never defend Obama's every action, nor would I excoriate his every action. I just don't get that sort of team-mentality. I like to think issue by issue, instead of "I hate him so here's my spin" or "I love him so here's my spin". You dig?

Don't get me wrong: I snark at people all the time when the mood strikes me. I'm no angel, and I freely say that I'd not change my vote, had I the chance to do it again. That doesn't make me a "blinders-on" an "Obama-bot" a "Cheerleader" or any other similar insult. I also don't care for the "hater" or whatever other nicknames that people sometimes use.

EDIT:

That said - I gotta get the grill fired up. I need some food before I can continue.

[Dappleganger]

7. I think they all chose to believe the lies from BP from the very beginning...

and when other sources began consistently showing BP's lies to be what they were, the Coast Guard changed their story.

I mean, how could anyone believe that a major corporation would *LIE* like that?? Really! :sarcasm:

[Uncle Joe]

9. I don't believe so..

not according to this Rolling Stone column, there is a pic made of worst cas scenario during a high level meeting early after the crisis started.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x541228



Hours after BP’s rig sank on April 22nd, a white board in NOAA's "war room" in Seattle displays the administration's initial, worst-case estimate of the spill — 64,000 to 110,000 barrels a day.

Thanks for the thread, malaise.

[malaise]

10. Thanks for that very important graphic

Uncle Joe. They had a worse case scenario estimate.

[Hekate]

11. From my observation, the media ran with the story; the CG was cautious in its statements.

No "collusion" or "lying." The Coast Guard has its mission, and so far has never failed us, afaik.

Hekate

[malaise]

17. Thanks

My problem is that I don't see how I blame the President when the previous administration ensured that regulators are owned by corporate interests. I don't know enough about the Coast Guard operatives so I wondered if they are as compromised as say MMS.

[tekisui]

25. They said a couple a times that an approach was 'working'.

At those times, BP wouldn't go that far. Who gave the CG the info? They chose to make those statements which were inaccurate.

[Hekate]

12. From my observation, the media ran with the story; the CG was cautious in its statements.

No "collusion" or "lying." The Coast Guard has its mission, and so far has never failed us, afaik.

Hekate

[Blue-Jay]

13. The Coast Guard? Do they have any equipment to measure this?

[JuniperLea]

15. The Coast Guard upped their response in light of the new figures...

If they were in kahoots, they're really playing the game well.

Your guess is as good as mine! Sadly, we may never know the full truth.

[donco6]

20. It appears they just passed along whatever they were told.

Without question, without request for proof or evidence. Is that collusion? Hmmm . . .

[Individualist]

23. Exactly!

[tekisui]

26. That is what it seems to me.

I am not sure why they were so trusting.

[malaise]

28. Let me put it this way

Since NOAA had presented their worst case scenario they should have included both the BP figure and NOAA - afterall NOAA is an excellent government agency.
Funny NOAA were also correct re their warnings about Katrina.

[donco6]

29. Yeah, isn't that odd.

The National Oceanographic institute figures are ignored, in favor of those provided by the PEOPLE WHO BROKE THE OCEAN! WTF?

[malaise]

30. Bushco ignored NOAA leading up to Katrina

Why would you ignore your sister agency?
Funny how far ahead government agencies are re space exploration versus oil corporations' ocean exploitation. Deregulation leads to absolute chaos.

[cwydro]

24. I sure think the administration is in collusion.

I think that is why they are allowing the continuing use of dispersants...trying to "hide the body".

But, oh wait, there are going to be way to many bodies to hide. The fact they have let this get to this point is mind-boggling to me.

Sad. Appalling. Criminal.

[scarletwoman]

31. Coast Guard in collusion? Listen to Thad Allen say "we" everytime he speaks to the press.

I noticed this from the very beginning. Whenever Thad Allen gives a press conference about the catastrophe, he ALWAYS says "We are doing this. We are doing that." when he's talking about what BP is doing.

The Coast Guard isn't sending ROVs down to the riser pipe, BP is. But whenever Thad Allen talks about actions being taken by BP he always says "we", not "they".

Listen to his language the next time he appears before the cameras and mics. He'll never say "they", he is totally identifying with BP.