bush_cheney2004 Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 You keep pushing this lie, but repeating it over and over isn't going to make it true. Give it a rest. Not only is he pushing his usual lie, he is wrong about the efficacy of required blowout preventers in Norway, Brazil, or the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD. Kids.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 Not only is he pushing his usual lie, he is wrong about the efficacy of required blowout preventers in Norway, Brazil, or the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD. Kids.... Again it isn't a blow out preventer which they require in Norway and Brazil it is a acoustic shut off valve, and while it may not prevent blow out, it will shut down the oil at the ground. We are and have been talking about two different things although you don't get that because you are busy trying to prove your side right. Here is an article which talks about the problem and how Clinton tried to fix it and Bush got rid of that plan. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., sent President Obama a letter Thursday reminding him that in 2000 the Interior Department insisted "oil companies have 'reliable backup systems' in the event of a rig blowout." By 2003, the plan was scrapped. "This could be one of the world's greatest nightmare scenarios of an oil gusher," Nelson said. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/29/national/main6444311.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 (edited) Again it isn't a blow out preventer which they require in Norway and Brazil it is a acoustic shut off valve, and while it may not prevent blow out, it will shut down the oil at the ground. We are and have been talking about two different things although you don't get that because you are busy trying to prove your side right. You admitted to being wrong...twice...but continue to lie. Why you lie so much? President Bush was not inaugurated until 2001, and it looks like any prevention devices are certainly not 100% effective, unlike your "fail safe" lie. Edited May 2, 2010 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 You admitted to being wrong...twice...but continue to lie. Why you lie so much? President Bush was not inaugurated until 2001, and it looks like any prevention devices are certainly not 100% effective, unlike your "fail safe" lie. Yep and the plan to bring these rigs up to snuff was made in 2000 when CLINTON WAS IN OFFICE after a report came out in 1999 that said something like this could happen, and Scrapped in 2003 WHEN BUSH WAS IN OFFICE. I know where the blame lye I truly do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 Yep and the plan to bring these rigs up to snuff was made in 2000 when CLINTON WAS IN OFFICE after a report came out in 1999 that said something like this could happen, and Scrapped in 2003 WHEN BUSH WAS IN OFFICE. I know where the blame lye I truly do. Good idea...because the devices don't work! Stop lying..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 Good idea...because the devices don't work! Stop lying..... There is a difference between them never being tested in the real world and not working. See these types of blow outs are fairly rare and while these switches haven't been tested in the real world, and god lets hope it never come to that, they do work. Keep repeating what the BP spokes man keeps saying as if it is the word of god itself though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 There is a difference between them never being tested in the real world and not working. See these types of blow outs are fairly rare and while these switches haven't been tested in the real world, and god lets hope it never come to that, they do work. Keep repeating what the BP spokes man keeps saying as if it is the word of god itself though. I don't give a rat's ass about BP or your BDS...any idiot knows that if a $500,000 device would prevent this kind of liability, there would be a line wrapped around the coast to buy them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 I don't give a rat's ass about BP or your BDS...any idiot knows that if a $500,000 device would prevent this kind of liability, there would be a line wrapped around the coast to buy them. No there really wouldn't because that 500,000 dollars that big oil would have to spend on the 5000 rigs there are off the coast. Big oil knew these switches worked they just never thought a blow out would ever be this big that it would cost them more then putting these switches on. You can see that in the contingency plan for a blow out no one ever planned for one a tenth as big as this one. What it came down to is they assumed it would cost them less to clean up the oil and deal with the law suits then to put a switch on all their rigs. They were dead wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 (edited) What it came down to is they assumed it would cost them less to clean up the oil and deal with the law suits then to put a switch on all their rigs. They were dead wrong. Indeed. For him to argue that they would install the valves, without being forced to under law is sheer fantasy. For as we all know, Economics Trumps Virtue... Edited May 3, 2010 by Sir Bandelot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Indeed. For him to argue that they would install the valves, without being forced to under law is sheer fantasy. Bullpuckey....the devices were installed on some rigs...around the world.... and subsequently failed....not a prudent use for that $500,000 after all. Another one of those "fail-safe" lies to keep the bunny huggers happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Bullpuckey....the devices were installed on some rigs...around the world.... and subsequently failed....not a prudent use for that $500,000 after all. Another one of those "fail-safe" lies to keep the bunny huggers happy. Devices fail all the time. Especially high power devices. That's why there's something called maintenance inspections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Bullpuckey....the devices were installed on some rigs...around the world.... and subsequently failed....not a prudent use for that $500,000 after all. Another one of those "fail-safe" lies to keep the bunny huggers happy. That is not what the wall street journal says. The efficacy of the devices is unclear. Major offshore oil-well blowouts are rare, and it remained unclear Wednesday evening whether acoustic switches have ever been put to the test in a real-world accident. When wells do surge out of control, the primary shut-off systems almost always work. Remote control systems such as the acoustic switch, which have been tested in simulations, are intended as a last resort. Nevertheless, regulators in two major oil-producing countries, Norway and Brazil, in effect require them. Norway has had acoustic triggers on almost every offshore rig since 1993........ While U.S. regulators have called the acoustic switches unreliable and prone, in the past, to cause unnecessary shut-downs, Inger Anda, a spokeswoman for Norway's Petroleum Safety Authority, said the switches have a good track record in the North Sea. "It's been seen as the most successful and effective option," she said. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 (edited) Devices fail all the time. Especially high power devices. That's why there's something called maintenance inspections. ...and they still fail. Regardless, the benefits of offshore oil production far outweigh the costs, with or without adequate preventive measures. This will morph into a political event over disaster substance....it is already being called "Obama's Katrina". Edited May 3, 2010 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 (edited) ...and they still fail. Regardless, the benefits of offshore oil production far outweigh the costs, with or without adequate preventive measures. This will morph into a political event over disaster substance....it is already being called "Obama's Katrina". 15 months in office, and this president is the proud owner of a whole bunch of Katrinas. H1N1 flu Fort Hood shootings Kentucky Ice storms Haiti earthquake GM bankruptcy Christmas Day Underwear Bomber Housing policies in Chicago (No kidding) And now the disaster in the Gulf. This is BS with a capital B. At least 1,836 people lost their lives in Katrina and George Bush couldn't care less about a bunch of poor black people in New Orleans. This horrific image (i'm leaving space because it's really a very difficult picture) was Katrina (THOMAS DWORZAK/Time Magazine): Katrina my bum I hope the right keep up with this nonsense because the only people I hear saying that reside firmly on the right. Edited May 3, 2010 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 (edited) Katrina my bum I hope the right keep up with this nonsense because the only people I hear saying that reside firmly on the right. More bullshit...Obama is taking heat for siding with more offshore drilling to begin with....now this. And that certainly isn't coming from your simple-minded idea of the "right". WTF does the Haiti earthquake have to do with Obama? Edited May 3, 2010 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 More bullshit...Obama is taking heat for siding with more offshore drilling to begin with....now this. And that certainly isn't coming from your simple-minded idea of the "right". WTF does the Haiti earthquake have to do with Obama? Nothing that is the point. Ever since Bush has Katrina the right has been itching at a chance to pin Obama with his own. Fact is every time they say it looks dumber and dumber and you have hopped on that stupid bandwagon. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904575025091656446622.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Nothing that is the point. Ever since Bush has Katrina the right has been itching at a chance to pin Obama with his own. Fact is every time they say it looks dumber and dumber and you have hopped on that stupid bandwagon. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904575025091656446622.html Obama will have plenty of chances to screw it up....and already has. Don't think your guy is immune from calamity, because he isn't. Hell, you're in Canada....so you can't jump on any "stupid bandwagon". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Obama will have plenty of chances to screw it up....and already has. Don't think your guy is immune from calamity, because he isn't. Hell, you're in Canada....so you can't jump on any "stupid bandwagon". Don't have to be in the country to vote, or donate and you know that. Again it is a stupid argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Don't have to be in the country to vote, or donate and you know that. Again it is a stupid argument. I can make my arguments just as stupid as yours....you lose credibility points for not actually being in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 I can make my arguments just as stupid as yours....you lose credibility points for not actually being in the country. That aint in the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 you lose credibility points for not actually being in the country. Do you gain credibility points for pretending you are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 That aint in the Constitution. Neither is Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Neither is Canada. Actually it was, Articles of Confederation's Article XI. Canada just didn't want it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 (edited) More belittling comments from the classless buffoon to our South... "You're not a 'Murican,so shut up!!!" "You live in Canada...so you can't jump on any "stupid bandwagon" DDDDOOOORRRRRKKKK!!!! Edited May 3, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Actually it was, Articles of Confederation's Article XI. Canada just didn't want it. Nope...that isn't the US Constitution....a real American would know that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.