Activist Judge Condemns Own Grandchildren, Sides with Big Oil

[DP]

This just in from our New Orleans correspondent, Ken U. Effin-Beleevitt:

Idiot Judge Story

Something’s really wrong with our system if, in the midst of the worst man-made ecological disaster ever, one petty little judge can keep our nation from halting offshore oil drilling for six months while we study the danger.

If I lived in New Orleans, I’d be picketing this awful man’s house.

If I was President Obama, I’d be quietly asking someone to look into whether Judge Feldman has oil stock or has ever taken any money or favors from any of the oil companies drilling in the Gulf. If he has—and I betcha he has—he should be impeached and his decision reversed.

If I was one of this guy’s grandkids (assuming he hasn’t eaten them already) I’d call him up and say: “Grandpa, why do you hate our planet?”

I can understand politics.

I can understand greed.

 

But I can’t understand how a presumably intelligent man can make such a bad call when so much is at stake . . .

And I can’t understand how we could give a judge this kind of power in the first place.

Judge Martin Feldman, shame on you!

—D.P.

 

 

 

 

Well, well! Lookie here:

Out, Damn Spot!

.

Share This

[HolyKow]

1) There are a great many people in NOLA that actually are for this decision because they make their living on those rigs, so do not act like you know…apparently, you do not.

2) How is this related to West Seattle again?

hk

Share This

[JanS]

hk…the “politics” portion of the forum is not necessarily abut just local stuff. I f you were around during the prez elections, you probably remember that it got fairly heated in here at times. And, frankly, this affects us all, even here in WS.

DP..is it a conflict of interest? The judge does have investments in the oil industry, and with Transocean, and with Haliburton. And we have to remember that what was proposed by Obama was just 33 wells under development. There are many many more that just these 33 that were not affected by the ban. Just the ones “under development”. Drilling is not going to stop in the gulf. Putting a moratorium on these 33 is not going to take all oil wells away, nor will it take away from what the people in the gulf depend on.

Latest I heard was that Obama and Ken Salazar were going to implement another ban that Salazar says, will stick this time. We’ll see.

Share This

[Smitty]

1) Salazar is re-submitting – which tells me they know they will lose on appeal, which tells me the judge ruled correctly.

2) Judges own stock? Gasp! Recuse all judges from all cases where a financial conflict of interest (in this case a whopping $15,000!)*might* occur? Not a good idea.

Share This

[JoB]

smitty..

having a financial interest in a decision fits the classic definition of conflict of interest…

there is no dollar amount attached to it..

The problem in Lousiana is that it is difficult to find judges who don’t have a conflict of interest when it comes to oil companies…

so re-submitting and finding a judge without conflict of interest just might be a heck of a lot faster than working through the district and state courts on appeal…

Share This

[DP]

Smitty: It’s no stretch at all to think that $15,000 in oil stock could have influenced Judge Feldman to decide this case in the way he did. Not surprisingly, as soon as he made his ruling the value of oil stock went up.

Do you not see an ethical problem here? Hm . . . Not sure what would convince you then.

I believe that a judge should recuse himself from any case where he has a direct financial interest, and any ethics review board would second me on this. Besides that, I believe it’s a matter of law.

So you’re wrong on that score, Smitty. Sorry.

As far as the Salazar thing goes, I’m not clear on what you’re saying . . .

 

HolyKow: There is a more important issue than jobs involved here, and that is this beautiful Earth that we all share and depend on. If folks don’t grasp that the environment is bigger than any personal interest we might have as oil workers, car drivers, stockholders, etc., then I’m afraid we are truly doomed.

I’m not surprised that people working on oil rigs or in oil-related industries would be against the ban, nor do I fault them for wanting to make a living. I have sympathy for them, but my sympathy does not extend to the point where I say: “OK, Oil Companies, keep wrecking the planet, as long as nobody loses his job or loses money in the stock market.” At this point the let’s-not-inconvenience-anybody approach is no longer tenable. Change must happen.

It will be nice if that change happens thoughtfully, but I guess that depends on whether people get a clue in time.

Otherwise, the planet and everything on it—including oil jobs—is finished.

(On the bright side, I believe that some of BP’s $20 billion damages fund will go toward paying any roughneck who’s income suffers as a result of this, and I support that.)

 

JanS: If what you say about only 33 in-progress wells being affected is true, then I think the ban should be extended well beyond that. But more importantly, I think this matter should be in the President’s hands, not the hands of some parochially-minded judge.

Historically, judges have been very “kid gloves” about sticking their noses into Presidents’ handling of war, natural disasters, and other matters of national importance.

Is protecting our national heritage not also a matter of national importance? If not, I can’t imagine what would be.

 

Share This

[jwws]

IMHO this is a no brainer – oil will continue to gush into the Gulf for months until maybe BP can stop it, maybe not, then what??? – all big oil companies said they have no fix if this type of FU happens again so STOP IT ALL for a while until known working fixes are in place. With respect to people who rely on their living working on the rigs – there’s plenty of work cleaning up the mess that we will be living with for DECADES. In this economy a lot of us have had to redefine ourselves and our jobs why not the oil rig workers too?

Share This

[HMC Rich]

DP, I guess President Obama’s campaign should then give back the money he received from BP during his campaign. Isn’t that sort of a conflict of interest too? (OK I am stretching that a bit) but BP was a friend of his (#1 too) until this terrible incident. I will say this, the judge IMO should have excused himself from this case. But, I agree they should keep drilling.

There are thousands of oil wells in the Gulf. This is the first huge failure since 1979. The earth’s oil seepage accounts for 47% of the oil in the oceans. Are you going to sue the earth for oil seepage too? For a list of all the oil spills, go to this link. It is quite eye opening and sad. http://www.incidentnews.gov/

But, NOLA, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida need those private sector jobs to continue. They also need the leak to stop. .

Except for Census jobs the current policies are not helping the private sector create jobs. The oil companies need to drill and sell oil until more efficient alternative energies are available and relatively affordable. I sincerely hope a in-depth study and not a knee jerk reaction comes from this and is implemented to the betterment of our earth and people.

Sorry DP, I vote for people AND the earth. This is not the oil rig workers fault. It is a horrible disaster.

Deep drilling in the Gulf was started and has been OK’d by the last 3 (including the current administration)presidential administrations. This is not just Obama’s fault. The government encouraged this type of drilling. They gave the oil companies some great deals which land based drilling accrues 16 to 18 percent more taxes.

David, you know the President does not have carte blanche concerning his ability to take certain actions. (Although this one tries). He cannot unilaterally decree his wishes on every disaster and every issue. He did a great job of ignoring Nashville. Even his constitutional powers are limited.

Katrina showed the problems of the Federal Government and a crisis. Here is another. States have to ask for Federal Help. Kathleen Blanco was so inept along with the FEMA leader that both State and Federal governments failed the citizens of New Orleans and Louisiana.

There are rules prohibiting help from foreign vessels too. The EPA and Coast Guard are getting in the way of the cleanup too at times. This is a disaster in so many ways due to Federal regulations. BP and the companies associated owe the American public big time. But Obama cannot demand them to pay up. Fortunately it seems BP will pay up to an extent. I certainly hope so. I do not want the public to get screwed like the poor Alaskans did after the Exxon Valdez episode.

Look at the additional problems this current spill has caused. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/06/gulf-oil-spill-boat-captain-despondent-over-spill-commits-suicide.html

I love the sugar sand beaches down south. To see them fouled breaks my heart. To see it affect peoples livelihood is horrible. To see it causing the death of innocent wildlife makes me want to cry. Hopefully, they will finally stop the leak. Set appropriate safety regulation checks and balances in place and avoid another disaster. I certainly hope so.

Share This

[charlabob]

The corporatist judicial appointments on the lower courts will wind up being much more harmful to the consitutional rights of people than the Supreme Court. This Feldman guy is a prime example of that. That’s why the hold up on approval of Obama’s lower court nominees is so significant.

If Elena Kegen follows the usual (before Alito) rules of recusal, she will have to recuse herself on many major rulings, where she argued the original cases. In my fantasies, she will say, “I’m not going to recuse,” but, since we seem to play by a different set of rules than the right, she probably won’t do that.

Hmmm…I seem to remember, because I’m vewwy vewwy old, when the left was accused of ethical relativism — yet another example of “attack ’em on their strengths.” Unfortunately, when we try to attack the right on their strengths, we can’t find them.

Share This

[Smitty]

I just think this particular case is a bad example. We’ll see if it gets overturned or not on appeal. I’m sure someone will dig up info on the appeals court judge showing he/she/they have IRAs/Mutual funds/ETFs with some portion apportioned to an oil company. Odds are we all do – and all judges do as well – so recusal (especially for amounts this small) would be almost impossible to manage.

Share This

[ToddinWestwood]

I make my living from the big oil companies. Everyone here is scared that the drilling ban will slow our company down.

There is thousands of drill rigs out there now, there has been millions of gallons pumped without incident.

Punish BP, not everyone, including me and the people of the Gulf.

Share This

[HolyKow]

Point #6,

DP,

Do not get me wrong, I am appalled by the oil spill, BP and our unreasonable thirst for the black gold. I think the judge is wrongheaded and possible legally out of line for not recusing himself on what seems to be, prima facia, pretty clear cut conflict of interest issues.

However, people have this very liberal view of New Orleans that is, mostly, not actually the case. The voting base in NO metro is really pretty conservative, VERY Catholic and religious. Tourists see the quarter as being very whoop whoop, but do not realize that as you go down canal st. away from party city, it really gets to be a different place.

This includes opposing a great many logical restrictions on oil drilling. The amount of money that they pump into that city with jobs and secondary benefits, considering it still has very little left but food, tourism and the Saints, has an unholy grip on the populace there.

So, please understand that I am as sickened by this as we all should be, it was just the NO perception that I was attempting to add a balance to.

That and I was totally wrong to add the west seattle only #2, did not realize this was not one of the hyper-local threads at the time…apologies on that….

hk

Share This

[DP]

Thanks for the thoughtful comments, everyone.

¶ What’s good for the goose is good for gander. If Obama took money or got political support from BP, then he should make that fact known. (And yes, maybe he should give that money back.)

¶ ToddinWestwood, I assume you work for a fuel oil company or gas station. I’d be interested in hearing more of your thoughts on the crisis in the Gulf and whether your job will be affected.

Even people who don’t make their living off oil still use it, every day. That includes me. I would like to see us go to a green economy, and I think any new jobs in that economy should first be offered to those affected by the switch. It’s only fair.

¶ HMCRich: This “statistic” about 47% of the oil in the sea being the result of natural seepage sounds pretty bogus to me.

In the first place, where did you get this number? You don’t site the source. In the second place, what does it even mean? Is that an average for all oceans combined? Is it based on a parts-per-billion count, or what? The implication would be that oil seeping slowly out onto the ocean floor from somewhere in the mid-Atlantic has the same ecological impact as oil dumped into a pristine Alaskan bay, which would be patently absurd.

Anyway, suppose I buy it. OK, so 47% of the oil in the oceans around the world got there naturally.

—Great! That makes me feel soooo much better about BP spewing an additional 70,000 more gallons a day into one spot near the Gulf Coast for the rest of the summer.

—So BP’s off the hook then, according to you. Don’t sue them or expect them to pay for anything, right? —Because some oil leaks into the sea naturally. Sheesh!

Come on, dude!

 

During the 1980s, Ronald Reagan argued that we shouldn’t be worried about air pollution because, according to him, TREES caused more pollution than factories.

(Anyone else remember that? It made Reagan a laughing-stock and permanently destroyed his credibility on all things scientific.)

HMC R, your comment about natural oil seepage reminded me of Reagan’s immortal “trees cause pollution” gem.

.

Share This

[ToddinWestwood]

DP – No I work as a journeyman machinist for a worldwide company that supplies the oil and gas industry with multi-stage turbines, steam turbines and recipricating compressors. Our shop is the N.W. Service Center for all of the refineries in Ore, WA, Alaska, and Wyoming.

Share This

[ToddinWestwood]

Thanks for assuming I am a clerk at the local Shell station.

Share This

[JanS]

hey, Todd, are you saying disparaging things about the local Shell station?

to all…you know what they say about “assume”…it makes an a$$ out of u and me……

Share This

[HMC Rich]

DP

Articles and PDF’s supporting the 47%:

http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/reports/reprints/Kvenvolden_GML_23.pdf

or

http://geology.com/news/2007/enormous-oil-seepage-in-the-gulf-of-mexico.shtml

I didn’t cite it because the figure was easy to look up but yes, I should have included the links.

Now, If I told you Republicans received 4 to 1 contributions from BP would you want that stat cited too? Since it makes Republicans look bad?

Anyway, you’re being flippant about the other 53%. This is the worst man made disaster in the US. Why would I get even a modicum of satisfaction out of this? Do not let your stereotypes of the right color your perceptions. (unless you really can’t tell the difference.)

By the way. Reagan didn’t get us nuked like possibly you and others thought he would. Remember those marches? There were thousands of people protesting him. It was impressive how the anti Reagan crowd got out and marched. Fast Forward to 2010 and the Tea Partiers and the Anti-War activists are out. Don’t you love the right to assemble peaceably>

I take Reagan over Carter any day, anytime, any second. And no, I do not remember the trees statement by Reagan. But I do remember hearing Ketchup could be considered a fruit or veggie. I will look into that tree thing. Now, If you were a global warming alarmist, would not his statement support your view? What I was trying to point out is balance. Anything too far one way seems to cause problems. Wouldn’t you say?

Look, bring up your points. It is about the discussion. I see plenty wrong with the world. If we don’t share our thoughts, then we live in a vacuum.

Share This

[JoB]

HMCRich..

so ..

Ronnie told you what you wanted to hear.. everything’s cool…

and Jimmy told you what you didn’t want to hear.. this isn’t cool and we need to do something about it…

and you would take ronnie over jimmy any day…

just shows what a good PR firm can do for you.

Has it escaped your attention that Ronnie’s Alzheimers didn’t develop on the last day of his presidency? He was a mouthpiece… you should read a little history to find out who was really running the country.. and a little more to find out what that administration really did for/to us.

Ronnies rising tide sunk small business in the United States… yet we still hear and many still believe in trickle down economics….

you do know what runs downhill, don’t you?

too many bought that con with you so now instead of fuel efficient cars and investment in green technology we have a dependence upon oil so great that we are willing to destroy the gulf of mexico and wage foreign wars for the opportunity to drive cars we once labeled gas guzzlers and abandoned in droves.

but he sure looked good on tv and made us feel good about our own greed didn’t he?

He wasn’t so bad.. he somehow didn’t manage to destroy us all….

Share This

[HMC Rich]

Ha Ha Ha Ha. Do coins have only one side or two. I swear yours would only have one side. You crack me up. You seem like the African Wolverine in the Gods Must Be Crazy. Thanks for the laugh.

Share This

[JoB]

Laugh if you want to…

but i listened to a program on NPR yesterday that said we are facing a waxing waning series of economic recessions the like of which we haven’t seen since the 80s…

Ronald Reagan.. president from 1981-1989

Share This

[HMC Rich]

No. More like the Depression. FDR 1933 to 1945.

Recession during Carter years crosses into Reagan years. Like it or not, whether Volcker Fed Policies worked or Reagan tax cuts, the economy took off after 82/83 and brought confidence back to the US citizen. Inflation and unemployment went down. Fact.

Even downtown Seattle started to rejuvenate during that time.

Capitalism. It goes up and down. It is only a system. It is up to the people how well it works. If you don’t meddle too much it works fairly well but you have to be careful. There is a need for some regulation to keep the thieves in check. No matter what system, someone will try to game the system.

Current idiot in office isn’t creating any jobs except government jobs. This administration is scaring business people. Taxes will rise. All will be affected. There will be no growth until his or Congresses policies change. If they don’t then one term.

Could I have gotten behind a true infrastructure rebuilding initiative. Possibly? We need roads, etc.

Just to be fair. Did I like the fact that the AMT was expanded to the middle class during Reagan years? NO.

At least I can see some good and bad, but you don’t return the favor.

Have some balance please.

Share This

[anonyme]

HMC Rich: I agree with you regarding balance and appreciate your rational thinking – even when I disagree with your interpretations. We’ve all become so politically polarized that the entire system is in gridlock. No nuance, no discussion allowed. It seems like everyone is enraged by the system – the debate is over who to blame. I consider myself to be ultra progressive with some hard conservative streaks. The two are not mutually exclusive as many choose to believe.

That said, I suggest we use Tony Hayward’s yacht to plug the oil leak – with him in it. It would be a start.

Share This

[JoB]

HMCRich..

current idiot in office CAN’T create any jobs except government jobs :(

but our cash rich corporate structure could..

and aren’t.

if you are counting on a “free market” to float your boat you had better train for a career in the financial sector because that is who is making money these days.

Share This

[WorldCitizen]

Is it unreasonable to say that a blanket moratorium is overkill? I heard a valid enough argument stating they should treat the drilling moratorium like they would a public safety recall. If Boeing 747s need to be grounded to have their windshield heaters fixed, then you don’t ground all of the planes until they are all fixed. Instead, you get them back in the air as soon as each individual plane is done.

Why not treat the drilling platforms this way as well? Do individual inspections of equipment, procedures, and personnel on a rig-by-rig basis. When each rig passes, put it back in business on sites that are more reasonable, and not as deep as the Horizon site.

It seems preventing these 33 rigs from being able to employ 8,000 people directly (and indirectly many more) is overkill. It’s a huge, immediate hit to the economy of a state still in recovery from a natural disaster that happened 5 years ago. The safety measures seem warranted, but they are being carried out in such a blunt fashion with this strict 6 month blanket moratorium. This situation can still be used as an opportunity to cast a light on our obvious need to rethink the lack of aggression with respect to advancing our renewable energy policy.

Knee-jerk reactions never seem to work out well…no matter what the intentions of the people making them are.

Share This

[JoB]

world citizen..

i hope they are using the moratorium to construct safety standards which are sorely lacking…

tho to be honest had BP followed it’s own internal policies this spill likely wouldn’t have happened.

Share This

[Author]

Posts