Let me be clear, I can't stand windbags like Carville. I couldn't stand him when he was in the Clinton administration and I cant stand him now. While its true he's not an expert on anything (except windbagging), his ( and Chris Matthew's) rant gave front-page voice to frustrations that have been welling beneath the surface (pun unintended) for a large number of reasonable-minded people. This includes many prominent scientists, moderate and reasonable writers like Bob Edwards, and many reasonable blogger's on DailyKos
For example (follow me over the fold)
PS. (in case of HR fever) The title is a take on Carville's famous mantra from the Clinton years
Even prominent scientists like Sylvia Earle (now apparently a favorite of the "you dont have the facts, so leave the Obama administration alone" crowd):
(Please see jamess's dairy, which helped me wrte this one, for more details)
Scientists Fault Lack of Studies Over Gulf Oil Spill
By Justin Gillis, NYTimes -- May 19, 2010
"It seems baffling that we don’t know how much oil is being spilled," Sylvia Earle, a famed oceanographer, said Wednesday on Capitol Hill. "It seems baffling that we don’t know where the oil is in the water column."
To which the Head on NOAA replies (almost a month into the crisis, while still spouting the 5000 barrels canard):
"We’re in the early stages of doing that, and we do not have a comprehensive understanding as of yet of where that oil is," Jane Lubchenco, the NOAA administrator, told Congress on Wednesday. "But we are devoting all possible resources to understanding where the oil is and what its impact might be."
Or this from someone who was actually involved in a previous oil spill:
Rick Steiner, a marine biologist and a veteran of the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, assailed NOAA in an interview, declaring that it had been derelict in analyzing conditions beneath the sea.
or this one from a congressman
Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who led the hearing, said he'd work to get that information from BP.
"The true extent of this spill remains a mystery," Markey said. He said BP had said that the flow rate was not relevant to the cleanup effort. "This faulty logic that BP is using is . . . raising concerns that they are hiding the full extent of the damage of this leak."
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/...
Also, note that although the windbag Chris Matthews may have wondered aloud about sending captain Nemo 5000 ft below the surface to weld the things shut, none of the above comments by prominent scientists OR THE CONCERNS VOICED IN MOST DIARIES ON DAILYKOS RECENTLY, have anything to do with why the leak is not already fixed, or why Obama wont don a wet suit and go fix it himself. It has to do with the continuing pattern of this administration of not telling us what they are up to: e.g. Pharma negotiations on HCR; The collusion of the Fed and Bank Lobby on Banking reform; The super top secret committee filled with Social Security haters who are deliberating on Social security; etc. Then there is the whole pattern of saying they support things and then just sort of finessing it away (Public Option; Volker Rule; Consumer Protection)
Most of us had thought that AT LEAST one thing Obama could have done (even if he only delivered milketoasty legislation) was stick to his word about having a free flow of information . Why cant he even keep his word on this ONE thing:
Less than two months into the his presidency, Obama issued a presidential memorandum on scientific integrity
"to ensure that in this new administration, we base our public policies on the soundest science," he said, "and that we are OPEN and HONEST (my caps) with the American people about the science behind our decisions."
Obama set a 120-day deadline for a directive to lay out the details of the science policy. The document is now almost a year late.
SO WHAT ALL THIS LIBERAL WHINING IS ABOUT my friends is the following:
- why has the governments response and guidance of BP has been so "fact-free". Why is the government not providing detailed press conferences where the press can get more information about what is actually going on. And have BP attend those press conference to answer questions?
- Why hasn't the government required BP to provide reasonable accurate flow rates of the gusher from day 1 (or 2 or 3). Or provide freely accessible imaging data?
- Why cant the government seem to separately address the issue of the cleanup, and data gathering? Blaming the lack of one on the other?
- Why is EPA only now addressing the toxicity of the dispersant.
- Why the NOAA downplay and muzzle the scientists on the Pelican, when they reported the oil plumes. Even going so far as saying that underwater plumes are just a conjecture, when they know bloody well that studies have already established the formation of plumes in deep cold water?
- Why are NOAA officials saying that they couldn't get measuring instruments down there because they're busy trying to fix the gusher, when essentially nothing was happening at the leak site for over a week as they built the stupid 'top hat'.
- Why did the administration not send legal help to the affected areas to make sure BP was not up to shenanigans like making people sign 'waivers'
- Why does the administration not already have makeshift information centers for Health and Legal advice for the people affected, or why are there no plans yet 30 days after the fact to do so? Or why dont they just at least monitor what is going on?
- Why did they administration allow the coast guard to become a wholly owned subsidiary of BP--e.g. preventing access to media?
- Why does Obama feel that every time he talks about this disaster, he MUST reiterate how he is not ruling out further offshore drilling? Almost like he is more concerned with oil industry CEO emotions than those Americans actually suffering and in Anguish.
But he did not retreat from his plan to expand offshore oil drilling and in fact portrayed the commission as a means to make that possible despite the disaster.
"Because it represents 30 percent of our oil production, the Gulf of Mexico can play an important part in securing our energy future," the president said. "But we can only pursue offshore oil drilling if we have assurances that a disaster like the BP oil spill will not happen again."
NYTIMES
Note the rope-a-dope on the 30%---thats US production (so it makes it sound significant), but it is actually less than 10% of consumption. He could have said "lets not have to drill anymore by reducing consumption by 10%". Would that have been so hard>? or would that piss off his corporate buddies? Its the same pattern, he partly blames "all americans " for the mortgage crisis, he says things to the effect that Banks bonuses cant be controlled by the government because then they'd have to control bonuses for baseball player (never mind that we don't bail out baseball players. (sorry I couldnt find the quote). Its all a pattern of political rope-a-dope that I though he was above doing.
- Why hasn't Obama highlighted the potential environmental devastation that is now certain to occur? Why hasn't he at least provided some appropriate emotional connection with the American People about this crisis? Is he tone deaf?
Finally to top it all off, he says this during the financial crisis
Obama dismissed the commission idea, saying it showed McCain was trying to pass the buck instead of offering concrete plans to deal with the nation's economic crisis.
"This isn't 9/11," Obama said at a campaign stop in Golden, Colorado. "We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out. I'll provide it. John McCain won't."
MSNBC
And then guess what? When perhaps the greatest man-made environmental disaster ever is on hand, that's exactly his main public response. And of course he makes sure its 'bipartisan'! And raves that they are both great 'politicians'! Even Reagan was smart enough to make the lead person a trusted scientist (Feynman).
So even if you think "Obama Administration can do no wrong" at least please address the true concerns of who think it can.