OT- Obama’s pissed now

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1][quote=flu]

Media loves this “corporation against us thing”….

Toyota bashing.
BP bashing (though they are botching around with this cleanup)
Goldman
..

I guess people don’t need to worry about tainted food from China anymore. Looks like we’ll get plenty from the Gulf.[/quote]

Yeah, poor defenseless multi-billion dollar corporations against the liberal media.[/quote]

Did say that, but come on…Americans love a good versus evil story…They suck this up…They love happy/fairy tale endings…That’s why we get Brothers Grimm version of the Little Red Riding Hood (the original version, the wolf eats little red riding hood), pinnocchio (the original versus is a real kid that works as a puppet), and a few other of my favorites that were “americanized” with a happy ending…

That’s not reality jack…Still waiting for that outcome from Goldman investigations…I think you’ll soon find..Just a slap on a wrist, and nothing more…

Should these companies be held accountable. Absolutely…Is this administration or any administration going to do it? Most likely not….BP is gonna drag this issue out as long as they can…Because what’s one current administration’s issue isn’t gonna carry over into the next one, or the next one…They’re going to bankroll that people aren’t going to care so much about this issue once another corruption/fingerpointing/etc hapens…Goldman must love all this media BP is getting, because have you seen Goldman front page these days?? Nothing to see, move along…It’s pretty interesting how myopic people get from news sources like CoNNed (Cnn)….when things do/don’t appear on page 1.

[Aecetia]

Speaking of the liberal media: from the Rolling Stone-
“Even after the president’s press conference, Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how bad it could be. “The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,’ says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.'”

“The median figure for Crone’s independent calculations is 55,000 barrels a day – the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. A source privy to internal discussions at one of the world’s top oil companies confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. ‘The industry definitely believes the higher-end values,’ the source says. ‘That’s accurate – if not more than that.’ The reason, he adds, is that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells in the Gulf. ‘BP screwed up a really big, big find,’ the source says. ‘And if they can’t cap this, it’s not going to blow itself out anytime soon.'”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965

More transparency from the anointed one.

[Aecetia]

Speaking of the liberal media: from the Rolling Stone-
“Even after the president’s press conference, Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how bad it could be. “The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,’ says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.'”

“The median figure for Crone’s independent calculations is 55,000 barrels a day – the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. A source privy to internal discussions at one of the world’s top oil companies confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. ‘The industry definitely believes the higher-end values,’ the source says. ‘That’s accurate – if not more than that.’ The reason, he adds, is that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells in the Gulf. ‘BP screwed up a really big, big find,’ the source says. ‘And if they can’t cap this, it’s not going to blow itself out anytime soon.'”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965

More transparency from the anointed one.

[Aecetia]

Speaking of the liberal media: from the Rolling Stone-
“Even after the president’s press conference, Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how bad it could be. “The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,’ says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.'”

“The median figure for Crone’s independent calculations is 55,000 barrels a day – the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. A source privy to internal discussions at one of the world’s top oil companies confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. ‘The industry definitely believes the higher-end values,’ the source says. ‘That’s accurate – if not more than that.’ The reason, he adds, is that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells in the Gulf. ‘BP screwed up a really big, big find,’ the source says. ‘And if they can’t cap this, it’s not going to blow itself out anytime soon.'”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965

More transparency from the anointed one.

[Aecetia]

Speaking of the liberal media: from the Rolling Stone-
“Even after the president’s press conference, Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how bad it could be. “The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,’ says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.'”

“The median figure for Crone’s independent calculations is 55,000 barrels a day – the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. A source privy to internal discussions at one of the world’s top oil companies confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. ‘The industry definitely believes the higher-end values,’ the source says. ‘That’s accurate – if not more than that.’ The reason, he adds, is that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells in the Gulf. ‘BP screwed up a really big, big find,’ the source says. ‘And if they can’t cap this, it’s not going to blow itself out anytime soon.'”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965

More transparency from the anointed one.

[Aecetia]

Speaking of the liberal media: from the Rolling Stone-
“Even after the president’s press conference, Rolling Stone has learned, the administration knew the spill could be far worse than its “best estimate” acknowledged. That same day, the president’s Flow Rate Technical Group – a team of scientists charged with establishing the gusher’s output – announced a new estimate of 12,000 to 25,000 barrels, based on calculations from video of the plume. In fact, according to interviews with team members and scientists familiar with its work, that figure represents the plume group’s minimum estimate. The upper range was not included in their report because scientists analyzing the flow were unable to reach a consensus on how bad it could be. “The upper bound from the plume group, if it had come out, is very high,’ says Timothy Crone, a marine geophysicist at Columbia University who has consulted with the government’s team. “That’s why they had resistance internally. We’re talking 100,000 barrels a day.'”

“The median figure for Crone’s independent calculations is 55,000 barrels a day – the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez every five days. A source privy to internal discussions at one of the world’s top oil companies confirms that the industry privately agrees with such estimates. ‘The industry definitely believes the higher-end values,’ the source says. ‘That’s accurate – if not more than that.’ The reason, he adds, is that BP appears to have unleashed one of the 10 most productive wells in the Gulf. ‘BP screwed up a really big, big find,’ the source says. ‘And if they can’t cap this, it’s not going to blow itself out anytime soon.'”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965

More transparency from the anointed one.

[briansd1]

[quote=CDMA ENG]What is the fascination with Obama losing his cool?

It’s like because he is a black man people want to see him “lose it” pull out is nickle plated 9 and get gansta on BP… Come on…

He has tempered his response appropiately… More so than other would have.

A good leader delegates… Now lets see if he picks the right delegates to get his name out of the mud/oil.

CE[/quote]

I agree with you CE. Obama responded appropriately to the oil spill in a measured way. As BP’s incompetence in capping the gusher was becoming apparent, the Administration stepped up the pressure on BP.

The moratorium on new offshore drilling is appropriate.

I’m really confused by the messages coming from the right.

Which is it?

1) Is Obama too cool and mild mannered toward the corporations?

2) Is he too tough on private businesses? Shall we just suck it up and accept that devastating oil spills do happen and go on with business as usual?

Even as Mr. Obama has been attacked at home for his mild manner, so has Mr. Cameron, the new prime minister, been criticized here for not standing up more forcefully to the United States as BP’s fortunes have continued to plummet.

[briansd1]

[quote=CDMA ENG]What is the fascination with Obama losing his cool?

It’s like because he is a black man people want to see him “lose it” pull out is nickle plated 9 and get gansta on BP… Come on…

He has tempered his response appropiately… More so than other would have.

A good leader delegates… Now lets see if he picks the right delegates to get his name out of the mud/oil.

CE[/quote]

I agree with you CE. Obama responded appropriately to the oil spill in a measured way. As BP’s incompetence in capping the gusher was becoming apparent, the Administration stepped up the pressure on BP.

The moratorium on new offshore drilling is appropriate.

I’m really confused by the messages coming from the right.

Which is it?

1) Is Obama too cool and mild mannered toward the corporations?

2) Is he too tough on private businesses? Shall we just suck it up and accept that devastating oil spills do happen and go on with business as usual?

Even as Mr. Obama has been attacked at home for his mild manner, so has Mr. Cameron, the new prime minister, been criticized here for not standing up more forcefully to the United States as BP’s fortunes have continued to plummet.

[briansd1]

[quote=CDMA ENG]What is the fascination with Obama losing his cool?

It’s like because he is a black man people want to see him “lose it” pull out is nickle plated 9 and get gansta on BP… Come on…

He has tempered his response appropiately… More so than other would have.

A good leader delegates… Now lets see if he picks the right delegates to get his name out of the mud/oil.

CE[/quote]

I agree with you CE. Obama responded appropriately to the oil spill in a measured way. As BP’s incompetence in capping the gusher was becoming apparent, the Administration stepped up the pressure on BP.

The moratorium on new offshore drilling is appropriate.

I’m really confused by the messages coming from the right.

Which is it?

1) Is Obama too cool and mild mannered toward the corporations?

2) Is he too tough on private businesses? Shall we just suck it up and accept that devastating oil spills do happen and go on with business as usual?

Even as Mr. Obama has been attacked at home for his mild manner, so has Mr. Cameron, the new prime minister, been criticized here for not standing up more forcefully to the United States as BP’s fortunes have continued to plummet.

[briansd1]

[quote=CDMA ENG]What is the fascination with Obama losing his cool?

It’s like because he is a black man people want to see him “lose it” pull out is nickle plated 9 and get gansta on BP… Come on…

He has tempered his response appropiately… More so than other would have.

A good leader delegates… Now lets see if he picks the right delegates to get his name out of the mud/oil.

CE[/quote]

I agree with you CE. Obama responded appropriately to the oil spill in a measured way. As BP’s incompetence in capping the gusher was becoming apparent, the Administration stepped up the pressure on BP.

The moratorium on new offshore drilling is appropriate.

I’m really confused by the messages coming from the right.

Which is it?

1) Is Obama too cool and mild mannered toward the corporations?

2) Is he too tough on private businesses? Shall we just suck it up and accept that devastating oil spills do happen and go on with business as usual?

Even as Mr. Obama has been attacked at home for his mild manner, so has Mr. Cameron, the new prime minister, been criticized here for not standing up more forcefully to the United States as BP’s fortunes have continued to plummet.

[briansd1]

[quote=CDMA ENG]What is the fascination with Obama losing his cool?

It’s like because he is a black man people want to see him “lose it” pull out is nickle plated 9 and get gansta on BP… Come on…

He has tempered his response appropiately… More so than other would have.

A good leader delegates… Now lets see if he picks the right delegates to get his name out of the mud/oil.

CE[/quote]

I agree with you CE. Obama responded appropriately to the oil spill in a measured way. As BP’s incompetence in capping the gusher was becoming apparent, the Administration stepped up the pressure on BP.

The moratorium on new offshore drilling is appropriate.

I’m really confused by the messages coming from the right.

Which is it?

1) Is Obama too cool and mild mannered toward the corporations?

2) Is he too tough on private businesses? Shall we just suck it up and accept that devastating oil spills do happen and go on with business as usual?

Even as Mr. Obama has been attacked at home for his mild manner, so has Mr. Cameron, the new prime minister, been criticized here for not standing up more forcefully to the United States as BP’s fortunes have continued to plummet.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=flu]

Brian. I think you have it backwards. If any reshuffling is going to occur at BP, it’s going to be

1)Creating a BP USA and separating it from BP international…

2)Having BP international assume the very profitable international businesses with the nicest assets.

3)Sticking BP USA with the liabilities of the Gulf…

BP doesn’t really need to do anything creative with it’s reorg…Namely, because there are plenty of companies beforehand that can already provide them with a playbook, or two, or three.[/quote]

FLU: BP already has an American operation that is a complete standalone: BP North America. While it answers to BP London, it is a self-contained operating unit.

And before anyone gets overly pumped up about “a legally bankrupt entity”, it isn’t going to happen. What will probably happen is that BP will sell one of its components, either upstream or downstream. BP is what is known as a fully integrated oil company, meaning it does everything from extract to refine. If it does spin off an operation, it also won’t be going to a Chinese company, I can guarantee you that.

All of the big supermajors learned about containing liability after the Exxon Valdez spill. Using that as an example, ExxonMobil now breaks up all the different parts of the shipping operation, from the vessel to the fuel, and disperses the liability through various subsidiaries, leased operations, etc.

While BP was completely unprepared for dealing with the spill, their attorneys are fully prepared for the liability.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=flu]

Brian. I think you have it backwards. If any reshuffling is going to occur at BP, it’s going to be

1)Creating a BP USA and separating it from BP international…

2)Having BP international assume the very profitable international businesses with the nicest assets.

3)Sticking BP USA with the liabilities of the Gulf…

BP doesn’t really need to do anything creative with it’s reorg…Namely, because there are plenty of companies beforehand that can already provide them with a playbook, or two, or three.[/quote]

FLU: BP already has an American operation that is a complete standalone: BP North America. While it answers to BP London, it is a self-contained operating unit.

And before anyone gets overly pumped up about “a legally bankrupt entity”, it isn’t going to happen. What will probably happen is that BP will sell one of its components, either upstream or downstream. BP is what is known as a fully integrated oil company, meaning it does everything from extract to refine. If it does spin off an operation, it also won’t be going to a Chinese company, I can guarantee you that.

All of the big supermajors learned about containing liability after the Exxon Valdez spill. Using that as an example, ExxonMobil now breaks up all the different parts of the shipping operation, from the vessel to the fuel, and disperses the liability through various subsidiaries, leased operations, etc.

While BP was completely unprepared for dealing with the spill, their attorneys are fully prepared for the liability.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=flu]

Brian. I think you have it backwards. If any reshuffling is going to occur at BP, it’s going to be

1)Creating a BP USA and separating it from BP international…

2)Having BP international assume the very profitable international businesses with the nicest assets.

3)Sticking BP USA with the liabilities of the Gulf…

BP doesn’t really need to do anything creative with it’s reorg…Namely, because there are plenty of companies beforehand that can already provide them with a playbook, or two, or three.[/quote]

FLU: BP already has an American operation that is a complete standalone: BP North America. While it answers to BP London, it is a self-contained operating unit.

And before anyone gets overly pumped up about “a legally bankrupt entity”, it isn’t going to happen. What will probably happen is that BP will sell one of its components, either upstream or downstream. BP is what is known as a fully integrated oil company, meaning it does everything from extract to refine. If it does spin off an operation, it also won’t be going to a Chinese company, I can guarantee you that.

All of the big supermajors learned about containing liability after the Exxon Valdez spill. Using that as an example, ExxonMobil now breaks up all the different parts of the shipping operation, from the vessel to the fuel, and disperses the liability through various subsidiaries, leased operations, etc.

While BP was completely unprepared for dealing with the spill, their attorneys are fully prepared for the liability.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=flu]

Brian. I think you have it backwards. If any reshuffling is going to occur at BP, it’s going to be

1)Creating a BP USA and separating it from BP international…

2)Having BP international assume the very profitable international businesses with the nicest assets.

3)Sticking BP USA with the liabilities of the Gulf…

BP doesn’t really need to do anything creative with it’s reorg…Namely, because there are plenty of companies beforehand that can already provide them with a playbook, or two, or three.[/quote]

FLU: BP already has an American operation that is a complete standalone: BP North America. While it answers to BP London, it is a self-contained operating unit.

And before anyone gets overly pumped up about “a legally bankrupt entity”, it isn’t going to happen. What will probably happen is that BP will sell one of its components, either upstream or downstream. BP is what is known as a fully integrated oil company, meaning it does everything from extract to refine. If it does spin off an operation, it also won’t be going to a Chinese company, I can guarantee you that.

All of the big supermajors learned about containing liability after the Exxon Valdez spill. Using that as an example, ExxonMobil now breaks up all the different parts of the shipping operation, from the vessel to the fuel, and disperses the liability through various subsidiaries, leased operations, etc.

While BP was completely unprepared for dealing with the spill, their attorneys are fully prepared for the liability.

[Author]

Posts