In short, bad as the Bush response to Katrina has been, Obama's response to the oil spill has been far, far worse -- to the degree where it is, in moral terms, almost criminally negligent.
And he elaborates (emphasis mine):
This disaster was all BP's fault, and in the long run BP should pay and pay and pay and pay and pay for its numerous violations of basic safety and response rules and practices. But the EFFECT of the disaster on the coasts and in the wetlands, and in the whole Gulf eco-system, could have been so greatly lessened if the administration were competent and caring that the blame for long-term damage must read in the Oval Office, in the person of that cold, detached Alinskyite who sees in this spill nothing more than yet another opportunity to stop other offshore drilling and push cap and trade. The word for his response, in every sense of the word, is "rotten."
Today's latest delay comes from BP and their decision to delay implementation of a new containment system because of weather concerns. Why this system isn't already in place 70 days into the disaster isn't clear.
The AP has a report on the psychological toll of the spill, which will only be compounded by continued delays and ineffective management from the federal response team.
By the way, the Taiwanese A-Whale still isn't in the Gulf skimming oil today. Ed Morrissey wrote about this wrinkle last week. The skimmer still, STILL, needs clearance from the EPA and probably a Jones Act waiver, although this is not a shore skimming vessel. The A-Whale would be working much further out from the shore than most skimmers. Anything outside of three miles from shore is free from Jones Act rules. But, I'm not clear on the issue of after the oil is collected; should the A-Whale come to American port, or transfer the oil to an American ship, does it need a waiver then? Any Jones Act experts out there, please feel free to clear that up for me.
Why hasn't this ship already been approved? Because the Coast Guard has to do a study and a report:
Coast Guard inspectors toured the ship for about four hours on Thursday to determine the ship's efficacy and whether it was fit to be deployed, said Capt. Matthew Sisson, commanding officer of the Coast Guard's Research and Development arm in New London, Conn.
"We take all offers of alternative technology very seriously," Sisson said. The ship, he said, is "an impressive engineering feat."
He would not offer a timetable for Coast Guard approval of the vessel, but said he will try to "turn around a report … as soon as humanely possible."
I want to know who is going to have the cojones to stand up to this administration and finally call foul over this.
Criminal negligence, indeed.
(Oh, and thanks to Jim Geraghty for the link in The Morning Jolt today!)