I have to admit... the saga of 33 trapped miners in Chile really hadn't gotten too much attention from me. I did offer a prayer or two on their behalf as their story bubbled up from time to time over the past 70 days. Starting last night and concluding tonight, Fox News has provided on-going coverage of the rescue effort to lift 33 men from a hole a half mile in the earth.

 

I don't even know the name of the President of Chile. I don't know his politics or beliefs. What I do know is that just over a year in office, he stuck his neck out - against the advice of his advisors - and announced to the world he would not rest until every trapped miner was set free. He invited technology and help from around the world. No expense was spared in bringing in topflight drillers and equipment. He oversaw the drilling of a rescue shaft and the implementation of technology assisted by NASA.

 

The rescue was expected to take four months, and was not optimistic in being able to bring all men out alive. The effort took just over half that time. For 24 hours, the President and his wife have been standing near the mine shaft to welcome each man to the surface. They allow the doctors and engineers to inspect them first, then to rejoice with their families and only then to embrace each miner and welcome them back to the surface.

 

If Mr. Obama had moved similarly, the Gulf Oil Spill could have been resolved much more efficiently and with far less impact for all.

 

As for the miners, the quote that stands out so far is, "They say there were 33 of us trapped down there, but there were 34... God was with us and did not leave us."

I have to admit... the saga of 33 trapped miners in Chile really hadn't gotten too much attention from me. I did offer a prayer or two on their behalf as their story bubbled up from time to time over the past 70 days. Starting last night and concluding tonight, Fox News has provided on-going coverage of the rescue effort to lift 33 men from a hole a half mile in the earth.

 

I don't even know the name of the President of Chile. I don't know his politics or beliefs. What I do know is that just over a year in office, he stuck his neck out - against the advice of his advisors - and announced to the world he would not rest until every trapped miner was set free. He invited technology and help from around the world. No expense was spared in bringing in topflight drillers and equipment. He oversaw the drilling of a rescue shaft and the implementation of technology assisted by NASA.

 

The rescue was expected to take four months, and was not optimistic in being able to bring all men out alive. The effort took just over half that time. For 24 hours, the President and his wife have been standing near the mine shaft to welcome each man to the surface. They allow the doctors and engineers to inspect them first, then to rejoice with their families and only then to embrace each miner and welcome them back to the surface.

 

If Mr. Obama had moved similarly, the Gulf Oil Spill could have been resolved much more efficiently and with far less impact for all.

 

As for the miners, the quote that stands out so far is, "They say there were 33 of us trapped down there, but there were 34... God was with us and did not leave us."

 

And I'm not certain - but I strongly suspect - that had President Obama done the same - he would have been excoriated for undertaking publicity stunts and not being focused enough on the war, the economy, etc. By one side of the aisle, anyway.

 

Just a guess.

There were people trapped under the oil spill?

The best way to end the oil spill drama was to plug the leak ... I don't know that Obama could have done anything to get that accomplished quicker than it was.

If Mr. Obama had moved similarly, the Gulf Oil Spill could have been resolved much more efficiently and with far less impact for all.

 

"[/i]

 

How?

 

I think every crisis deserves evaluation as to how it was handled . Could it have been handled differently? Better?

 

Your statement above, FB, is rather vague .

Edited October 14, 201016 yr by Clyde

How?

 

Well he could have started by changing his name, switching from Democrat to Republican, then replacing Joe Biden with Joe the Plumber, stepped down as President so the plumber could become President, then let the plumber fix the leak. Seems pretty simple.

How can a person that knows everything take a lesson from anyone?!?!?

The Chilean president was leaving on 10.15 for a trip to Europe regardless if they were out or not. So maybe it's more of a case of "hey, while I'm in country I'll hang out and wait in front of the cameras to help my sagging poll numbers which have gone up 10 points since I waved their first note in front of the cameras. It sure would help me if they were brought up before I got on my private plane."

I'm trying to figure out exactly what part of the process of the rescue that the Chilean president can take responsibility for? Oh! Yeah! The "How to deal with the media" guides that were sent down a few days ago in anticipation of the spectacle when they surfaced.

My singular response to all Obama defenders so far in this thread:

 

No one with any sense would suggest that the President has to run the whole crisis management effort. We simply need a leader able to comprehend the scope and potential impact of such a disaster from the start that will make resources available immediately. He would encourage the utilization of experts in ways to contain and clean up such a mess. He would save all the tough talk about making sure the big corporation responsible pays for their mistake until the crisis was halted and the full damages were assessed. This is almost exactly how the President of Chile led his people through a perilous event.

 

Instead, we have a seemingly angry, anti-private business, anti-fossil fuel, proponent of anything and everything green, that apparently allowed this disaster to proceed unabated to further his political agenda. As Rahm Emmanuel is well quoted, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."

 

I can provide numerous examples that will back my assertions here, but simply stated… Americans do not want or need a President that only seems to respond to disasters when it seems that the polls are favorable to do so.

 

I will be shocked to see that Obama carries one Gulf Coast state in 2012 if he even runs again at that time.

And I'm not certain - but I strongly suspect - that had President Obama done the same - he would have been excoriated for undertaking publicity stunts and not being focused enough on the war, the economy, etc. By one side of the aisle, anyway.

 

Just a guess.

 

I'd call it and educated guess, and one that's darn accurate.

I can provide numerous examples that will back my assertions here, but simply stated… Americans do not want or need a President that only seems to respond to disasters when it seems that the polls are favorable to do so.

 

.

 

That's exactly what is being said about this guy. Using this as a way to boost popularity.

My singular response to all Obama defenders so far in this thread:

 

No one with any sense would suggest that the President has to run the whole crisis management effort. We simply need a leader able to comprehend the scope and potential impact of such a disaster from the start that will make resources available immediately. He would encourage the utilization of experts in ways to contain and clean up such a mess. He would save all the tough talk about making sure the big corporation responsible pays for their mistake until the crisis was halted and the full damages were assessed. This is almost exactly how the President of Chile led his people through a perilous event.

 

Instead, we have a seemingly angry, anti-private business, anti-fossil fuel, proponent of anything and everything green, that apparently allowed this disaster to proceed unabated to further his political agenda. As Rahm Emmanuel is well quoted, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."

 

I can provide numerous examples that will back my assertions here, but simply stated… Americans do not want or need a President that only seems to respond to disasters when it seems that the polls are favorable to do so.

 

I will be shocked to see that Obama carries one Gulf Coast state in 2012 if he even runs again at that time.

 

You made a generic unsupported claim and we challenged you to back it up as it came off as nothing more than the traditional "here's a chance to nail our President" comment.

 

Secondly, it's apples and oranges as far as the situations go. One had a huge negative financial and ecological impact. One had 33 valuable lives trapped below ground.

 

"apparently allowed this disaster to proceed unabated to further his political agenda?" Please. Unsubstantiated partisan blather.

 

You're a strong fact provider usually. Not so on this one.

No single person on this site could ever paint me as an Obama supporter. In fact if they tried I would probably decry them as delusional at best. That said I disagree with your premise on this.

 

While I do feel as though his delay in responding did impact the cleanup efforts, I don't think that being there would have made any difference in whether it was cleaned up faster or not. As it if, if it weren't for nature's own answer the spill would not have been cleaned up as quickly as it was.

 

Believe me I do not support President Obama on many of his policies. However to think that the Chilean president's presence made a difference is in the speed of their rescue is quite ridiculous in my estimation.

You're a strong fact provider usually. Not so on this one.

Sorry... I actually do have a day job that requires attention.

 

As examples of how the President and his administration could have sped up the cleanup process by removing red tape, or not creating it, I cite the following as just a few I can come up with quickly:

 

• The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 makes the response to an oil spill the President’s responsibility.
   
  
• The President did not expeditiously waive the Jones act, which would have allowed needed assistance from other countries with better resources than we had on hand.
   
  
• There were approximately 60 separate foreign offers of resources to help with cleanup, the first one coming only nine days into the crisis… yet, two months later, 46 of those offers remained “under consideration.”
   
  
• Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal repeatedly warned, “It is clear we don't have the resources we need to protect our coast... We need more boom, more skimmers, more vacuums, more jack-up barges that are still in short supply.” And yet... the Administration refused to permit Louisiana to dredge protective sand berms to prevent the spill from penetrating delicate coastal marshes and estuaries.
   
  
• Obama stopped all drilling in the Gulf cutting over 40,000 well paying jobs, when most experts stated it would be safer to continue.
   
  
• The President refused to override the Occupational Safety and Health Administration workplace rules that hampered cleanup efforts. OSHA released a “Heat Stress Management Plan” that mandated workers could only work 10 minutes of every hour for the first two days on the job if they were “workers new to working in a hot environment, workers returning after three weeks of cooler weather, or returning after being sick.” Again, another layer of needless red tape.
   
  
• On May 2 Mr. Obama stated, “I'm not going to rest—and none of the gentlemen and women who are here are going to rest—or be satisfied until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil on the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of this region are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.” Yet during the first 60 days of the crisis, the President went on vacation twice, played eight rounds of golf, was a guest on the Jay Leno and George Lopez shows, and attended two rock concerts and a baseball game. I don’t think it is overly critical to state that this record certainly does not appear to be without plentiful moments of “rest”.
  

 

The fact that the Chilean President not only eliminated such barriers and governmental red tape, he actively reached out to all with the technology and resources to assist in this rescue. Whether the speed of this rescue may be attributed to him or not, at the very least he had the sense to get the government out of the way.

 

As far as taking advantage of a PR opportunity. Give me a leader able to help get things done and then bask in the limelight over an obstructionist ideologue still hungry for the nearest camera and teleprompter. :thumb: