Monday, July 19, 2010

My letter to the President @ @ 1 in the forking AM...
Dear Mr. President.
when you meet with PM Cameron on Tuesday please let's not do the reverse bend-over Lord Chamberlain thing, ok?
BP has completely controlled this situation, which has lost you the next election. Yet, if you bow down to this oil crime, as it seems your every action indicates, you can forget about another term in office.
Americans have watched you defer to British Petroleum at every turn of BP's self-created disaster. We are at the mercy of unfathomable threats to our shores. And you have given BP every opportunity to profit at our expense.
But if you bend over and take it from Cameron, then I won't have any respect left for you, and shall fear for the soundness of our democracy.
You have somehow believed your advisers and felt it was OK to go on vacation while the Gulf Coast of Your Country is dying. Wrong. Bad Move that one.
No Golf. No pretty pictures for you until your Nation is protected and healed.
I mean, come on.
You are losing Afghanistan.
You are losing the Gulf of Mexico.
You don't seem to be on the ball with infrastructure jobs either. So, what else do you have to offer but salvation for Wall Street?
What? I'm genuinely confused here.
No Space Program.
No National Rail System.
No Infrastructure Investment to speak of, so what will you do in the next 2 years to salvage your squandered presidency? What?
This oil crime is ridiculous and you need to land on it. Failure here will doom your chances for a 2nd term. Nobody will vote for your handing us over to the British.
Sounds simple, because it is simple. You have nothing else really working for the people. Nothing.
I'm just wondering why you haven't fired these people who have completely ruined your presidency.
If you come down to the Gulf just to SQUAT ON THE BEACH one more time, then I will know you did not receive this letter.
Thank you,
Editilla the Pun


Horatio Algeranon said...

The whole situation surrounding the installation of the latest "cap" makes no sense.

In an interview for CNN a month ago, BP chief operations Officer Doug Suttles said quite categorically (at about 8:30 into the video) that they would NOT attempt to stop the oil flow for fear that it would make things worse (specifically, under the sea bed) -- ie, out of concern for the integrity of the well casing.

Suttles said that assessment was based on information obtained during the failed top kill attempt.

So, here we are a month later with BP and the government doing precisely what Suttles said back then that they would NOT do.

And they appear to be keeping the cap on even in the face of what may be warning signs of the very situation that had given BP/Suttles pause about capping the well to begin with (well pressure lower than expected with the cap on and 'seeps" from the seabed)

The real concern here is not "who is in charge?" but "what are they basing their decisions on?"

What (if anything) has changed since Suttles/BP made their original assessment that led them to rule out a 'cap' like the one they just put on?

If the assessment back then was that there were potential problems with the well casing that might lead to failure if the pressure was increased due to capping, why would they nonetheless go ahead and put the cap on? (even for a "test?")

Did they somehow get "better" information in the interim that refuted the earlier information obtained during the top kill? (Engineering problems don't normally just fix themselves. ~@:>)

Granted, BP's claims are not always the same as reality, but BP has claimed that they now have the surface capability to collect virtually all of the oil coming from the well, so why would they (or the government) take ANY chance of "making the situation worse"? (in the words of Suttles)

Who made the latest decision to go ahead with the capping despite the earlier concern?

Higher-ups at BP?

Obama administration officials?

At the very least, the latest decision must have had the OK of the Obama administration.

Needless to say, when people make 180 degree "flips" in their stance, one really has to ask "why?" and wonder whether the flip had a valid (scientific/engineering) justification.

What IS the justification? for the change?

What is the justification for keeping the cap on if there is a chance (possibly even warning signs) that it might make things worse?

Marymac said...

Love the letter. Understand the frustration. I read to my husband and he said "Great Letter! Won't do any good."

Time for Civil Nonviolent Disobedience. Sounds cheesey I know but we have to start somewhere. Sitting in front of our computers does two things. It makes us fat. And it distills the anger. We get to vent. We need to vent via organized, physical action. It will be dangerous because, as you know, it is fine for the Tea Party to demonstrate. But "lefties"are not allowed. (reference dem and repug conventions) Plus, the MSM won't cover it or will slant the coverage.

What are we going to do boys and girls?


Editilla said...

I don't know, Mary and Ho, I just don't know.
I would like to see the American Pie Party formed. At least we could make sure these hoodlums get their Just Desserts --in the face.
E Pluribus Piem