Apparently it is fine to call the BP spill "Obama's Katrina" and compare it to Katrina.   And it is AWESOME to compare 9/11 to Pearl Harbor, over and over and over.  That comparison was used to start a war with Iraq.  Both of these events have had a large impact on America than 9/11 overall (beyond the reaction).  But now, say that the oil spill will impact American policy the way 9/11 did with foreign policy, and that is seen as "tone deaf"?  So now, 9/11 is a naughty word we can't even use EVER in discussion of American policy?  Are also to then say that NO other attack against America is like 9/11?

And it marked a shift historically in the nature of war, and a post-super power world.  There is problems if we can't use events like 9/11 in comparison to other events.  As I see it, Katrina is comparible to 9/11.  Katrina could of also been prevented had more been done to fix the levies.  The impact on lives of Katrina were were than those of 9/11.   America lost a city due to Katrina. 

And now, one has to wonder how how many lives will be adversely impacted by the oil spill. 

I personally am quite concerned about how Obama is treating this situation.  It almost appears that he is far more concerned in passing radical litigation, at least for a majority of the U.S. populace, my using the oil spill as a motivation and rational.  As members of his officials have put it "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste".  The best laws are not passed quickly and haphazardly. 

So, you are a supporter of drill, baby, drill, huh?  In that talk, is the Rush Limbaugh speculations that it was sabotage done by someone, to undermine offshore drilling.

My greatest concerns is people being lunatics in all their fears and endless speculations, and also the MONSTER inconsistencies in their views.  What we had for around 8 years from the last administration was one disaster after another, including running up the debt, and overextending America overseas.  And was there a peep of complaining?  Nah, anything radical then was seen as necessary.

Just label something radical, whether it is or not, and you are all set.  But the rushing of laws through is true.  The Patriot Act is one monster of ramthrough:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOSGkv7UC-8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN2PG1EJZ0Y

You really read far more into his post than I really saw there.

The US should be spending every spare dime it has (I know, not many right now) on getting off of oil.  There are 3 major reasons to get off of oil:

1) A lot of money goes to people that don't like the US very much.
2) Oil is a limited resource and there will be less and less of it in the future.
3) The climatological impact of producing enery using oil.

Is there anyone out there that doesn't agree with at least one of these?  It says alot about the current political situation in the US when something this obvious that just about everyone agrees with still can't get accomplished.

Let's leave off the climate change argument, which ends up merely causing people who are pro-oil to be suspect about and look at economic trends:

With China and India coming on board and getting industrialized, and wanting cars, we are looking at an unsustainable path long-term on many levels, that call for alternatives to be developed.  There is a pressing need to get off oil.

I wasn't saying that everyone agreed with all 3 issues.  But there are still a majority of people that do believe in the climate impact, so to exclude it as a reason makes no sense. 

My point was that if you agree with even 1 of those 3 issues, then you agree that this is the top priority of the US.

In regards to economic issues and energy independence, I am seeing far too much of politicians gambling on technology coming about that doesn't exist today, that will bail people out.  The believe somehow we will end up getting the needed technology and there won't be a need for fossil fuels.  Well, they aren't quite here today.

Resolving the energy issues is very important, the same with the whole spill fiasco.  However, I think there are trends VERY pressing regarding the economy.  Politicians want the status quo back and to work.  Want to know why lays underneath?  Well, there is increasing numbers of individuals with college degrees who can't find employment that matches what they were educated for.  That IS a problem.  If you get a college degree, and a lot of debt, and you are ending up having to make due on less than $15/hr, that IS a problem.  When the type of work increasing is of the low education level, there is a problem.  The entire college paradigm for training a workforce is broken.  It doesn't produce enough of the right kinds of workers.  THIS is a major problem, and would be close to being up there with energy independence.

I'm not so sure.  Even in the face of a disaster like this I'm not seeing an 'oil industry PATRIOT Act'.