The left's darling Bill Maher disses Obamao bigtime over the oil spill
-
Yes, Obama did allow for offshore drilling. He assumed it was safe. You know what they say about assumptions. His handling of this issue will come up in the next election.
The solution to drill on land isn't as clear cut above offshore drilling as you make it out to be. For offshore drilling, I am inclined to think that oil rigs had a decent track record as far as accidents go. The only one I've really ever heard about was Exxon-Valdez. So, under this assumption, you have two choices, drill Alaska or drill the Gulf.
Why not drill Alaska?
Many species, I'm sure some of which are endangered, otherwise this wouldn't be a huge issue, will undergo habitat destabilization if drilling were to occur. Now, elk, for example, prefer to live in heavily wooded habitats. In one example I've read about, 1% of a forest was affected by having a pipeline run through it, this resulted in the elk not using 60% of the forest, just because of one little pipeline. Numbers thinned, because the smaller habitat couldn't support population. So, by drilling Alaska, you are going to ruin ecosystems.
Then why drill the Gulf?
Because of having to deal with tree-huggers in Alaska, the Gulf becomes the obvious choice. Oil rigs have decent track records and safety precautions to prevent spills. There is less evidence of environmental harm of underwater drilling just because of the fact that it's harder to conduct a study in a broad ocean, and animal observations are much harder. So, if tree-huggers have a harder time giving you grief this way, you go this way, because they are the single largest obstacle to the established drilling of oil wells.
I think Obama made the obvious choice, but I don't really feel that too much blame should go to him, as there's no way, in 2008, the US President says, "we're cutting off all oil drilling. Time to line the Saudi's pockets." Does that not seem like political suicide? I will say though, that Obama is ultimately responsible for this, but I'll save my judgment for how he reacts to this situation, shutting off all off-shore drilling until a disaster like this is ensured to NEVER happen again is a good first step. Also, I do agree with Maher in that we NEED to get off of fossil fuels and find a renewable energy source which we start building our infrastructure around. I can only hope that this will be the kick in the ass this country needs to TRULY get that initiative started.
-
It is safe.
But the funniest part was watching Matthews' asshole tighten up when Bill tossed a weak barb at Saint Ted and Obama.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
It is safe.
But the funniest part was watching Matthews' asshole tighten up when Bill tossed a weak barb at Saint Ted and Obama.
WSS
It is safe.
But the funniest part was watching Matthews' asshole tighten up when Bill tossed a weak barb at Saint Ted and Obama.
WSS
Matthew's is one person I cannot stand. His voice alone is irritating. Kind of like someone grinding a fork on their teeth.
-
Mathews is just a vile, vicious lib. He doesn't matter.
The hypocrisy is dramatic on this issue, and Obama does
deserve serious flak.
why, I can't wait til Heck chimes in. Gosh, I wonder if he'll
defend Obama ? Maybe "ha ha Obama did the smart thing and
he looks like a genius now haha" .... ????
It's one thing to say we need to get off oil, which someday we should,
but another to have a VIABLE, AFFORDABLE ALTERNATIVE.
There is plenty of research being done. But pouting about our (and the world's)
dependence on oil doesn't help anything.
The world uses oil, because there is nothing else out there.
Unless some scientist discovers how to make grease/oil/gasoline out of manure or
some kind of crop.
Synthetic oil can be created chemically, but the expense would be crazy.
When that alternative comes into existence, the world will flock to it.
-
It is safe.
But the funniest part was watching Matthews' asshole tighten up when Bill tossed a weak barb at Saint Ted and Obama.
WSS
It is safe.
How can you honestly believe that when 11 people were killed from the initial explosion, and millions of gallons of this crap are pouring out into the environment which includes fisheries for Americans as well as a bunch of tourist areas. Yeah, really safe.
This is going to cost billions of dollars.Cal, there are other options out there, we're just not looking at them because technology is expensive to develop and this country was built on oil. Our infrastructure will have to change to accommodate whatever this new technology might be, but there are other options. Solar, hydrogen, wind, fusion, electric, etc. If we keep putting money into these things, eventually they'll be able to go as far gasoline powered vehicles. We NEED to get off oil, or we're gonna be in for a fun surprise when all that's left is in the Middle East. We're not putting enough of an effort into this R&D because there isn't a NEED for it right now. If we absolutely had to find an alternative viable energy source, and the only other option is going to war with China and Russia over the Middle East oil, I would bet we'd have that technology ready within 5 years. I'd love for it not to come to that, and again, I hope that this is the kick in the ass necessary to wean us off of black gold.
Dayum.
-
It is safe.
How can you honestly believe that when 11 people were killed from the initial explosion, and millions of gallons of this crap are pouring out into the environment which includes fisheries for Americans as well as a bunch of tourist areas. Yeah, really safe.
This is going to cost billions of dollars.Cal, there are other options out there, we're just not looking at them because technology is expensive to develop and this country was built on oil. Our infrastructure will have to change to accommodate whatever this new technology might be, but there are other options. Solar, hydrogen, wind, fusion, electric, etc. If we keep putting money into these things, eventually they'll be able to go as far gasoline powered vehicles. We NEED to get off oil, or we're gonna be in for a fun surprise when all that's left is in the Middle East. We're not putting enough of an effort into this R&D because there isn't a NEED for it right now. If we absolutely had to find an alternative viable energy source, and the only other option is going to war with China and Russia over the Middle East oil, I would bet we'd have that technology ready within 5 years. I'd love for it not to come to that, and again, I hope that this is the kick in the ass necessary to wean us off of black gold.
Dayum.
How can you honestly believe that when 11 people were killed from the initial explosion, and millions of gallons of this crap are pouring out into the environment which includes fisheries for Americans as well as a bunch of tourist areas. Yeah, really safe.
This is going to cost billions of dollars.
Hey one spill since the Exxon Valdez.
How many traffic deaths in that time?
We should put a stop to driving until it's 100% risk free,
WSS
-
Big oil rules the world. Obammy ran on the Green energy pledge as one of his promises. But lets face reality here. As long as there is a drop of oil to be had, man will use it. China would love to have our oil. Exxon Valdez was not an oil platform explosion, it was a ship who's hull was breached by a reef and leaked a substantial amount of oil in a contained area more or less compared to this platform explosion. BP should be investigated for this. I wonder how the hell this happened. Nice PR trip by Obammy to Louisiana. I think BP should bear the full expense of the clean up and repair, and also, reparations to all whose lives are affected by this leak.
-
How can you honestly believe that when 11 people were killed from the initial explosion, and millions of gallons of this crap are pouring out into the environment which includes fisheries for Americans as well as a bunch of tourist areas. Yeah, really safe.
This is going to cost billions of dollars.
Hey one spill since the Exxon Valdez.
How many traffic deaths in that time?
We should put a stop to driving until it's 100% risk free,
WSS
Hey one spill since the Exxon Valdez.
How many traffic deaths in that time?
We should put a stop to driving until it's 100% risk free,
WSS
Dude do you do ANY research before you spew out your sad platitudes from that tumor on your shoulders? There have been many spills in the U.S.A. since the Valdez went down. Stop driving till it's 100% risk free? How bout you stop yapping since you're 100% fact free.
-
Hey one spill since the Exxon Valdez.
How many traffic deaths in that time?
We should put a stop to driving until it's 100% risk free,
WSS
Dude do you do ANY research before you spew out your sad platitudes from that tumor on your shoulders? There have been many spills in the U.S.A. since the Valdez went down. Stop driving till it's 100% risk free? How bout you stop yapping since you're 100% fact free.
Dude do you do ANY research before you spew out your sad platitudes from that tumor on your shoulders? There have been many spills in the U.S.A. since the Valdez went down. Stop driving till it's 100% risk free? How bout you stop yapping since you're 100% fact free.
There are, of course, a few but none that even come close to this situation.
Even the Valzez (being a tanker) wasn't similar.
So you should want to ban oil tankers not offshore drilling.
And in this case the president is right.
It is safe.
100%?
No, nothing is, angry boy.
WSS
-
Vapor - there are not any AFFORDABLE alternatives.
We were at a wood furnace place a while back. He had solar panels. It was 375 bucks.
I was looking at it, and the owner said it was rated for 60 watts.
That's enough electricity to run ONE 60 watt light bulb.
As far as oil goes, I found out last night, honestly, that NASA doesn't use
"black gold" in their spacecraft. They use whale oil, from their blubber.
Don't know why, but the documentary says it's true.
Doesn't sound like there's -viable- alternatives to me.
Synthetic oil is cool, burns a LOT cleaner, but is very costly to make on any scale of production...
If Bush had said that oil drilling didn't contribute to oil spills, and this happened,
the media would have a gigantic frolicking, ridiculing field day, as well as all the dems in Congress,....
bah.
-
I am waiting for Sweet Crude Oil prices to double. This disaster will be a green weenie dream if they can drive the costs. A lot of them feel that this will create less consumption. And we know that is incorrect.
-
Hey one spill since the Exxon Valdez.
How many traffic deaths in that time?
We should put a stop to driving until it's 100% risk free,
These are not even comparable. Thousands of crashes need to happen before the costs accrue to a billion dollars. Here, one accident happened, and billions of dollars have been done to the economy. Some of the damage will be irreparable.
Vapor - there are not any AFFORDABLE alternatives.
At the moment, I would agree. We need to get R&D dollars into this and it will be. I just watched a presentation from a fellow physics major about a study on p-n junctions of solar cells and how they're becoming more and more efficient. Their efficiency has skyrocketed in the last 10 years, sorry, but I can't remember any numbers. As we learn more about these technologies, we'll learn to make them better, faster, stronger, etc, and hopefully we'll be more efficient at it, thus making the costs affordable. How much do you think a laser pointer would have cost in 1950?
April 20
April 25
April 26
April 27
April 29
May 1
Pictures from NASA
http://www.examiner.com/x-25803-Natural-Di...spill#slideshow
-
These are not even comparable. Thousands of crashes need to happen before the costs accrue to a billion dollars.
And there are around forty thousand deaths every year, and God knows how many injuries and loss of income.
Anybody wanna guess the murder rate?
Air crashes?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Where is the outcry from the media while Team obammy passes the buck onto BP?
Talking about dragging feet, these guys couldn't agree to anything unless it was taking your money.
Napolitano, Salazar defend federal response to oil spill
Although Mr. Obama did not make his first public statement on the situation until nine days after the initial oil rig explosion
-
These are not even comparable. Thousands of crashes need to happen before the costs accrue to a billion dollars.
And there are around forty thousand deaths every year, and God knows how many injuries and loss of income.
Anybody wanna guess the murder rate?
Air crashes?
WSS
And there are around forty thousand deaths every year, and God knows how many injuries and loss of income.
Anybody wanna guess the murder rate?
Air crashes?
WSS
You're still comparing apples to oranges. When a single f*ckup can lead to a result this devastating...
-
And there are around forty thousand deaths every year, and God knows how many injuries and loss of income.
Anybody wanna guess the murder rate?
Air crashes?
WSS
You're still comparing apples to oranges. When a single f*ckup can lead to a result this devastating...
You're still comparing apples to oranges. When a single f*ckup can lead to a result this devastating...
You're right of course.
All I'm trying to say is that there are dangers in the world. Big ones, and lots of them.
We can't insulate ourselves from all of them and the natural human desire for more and more modern conveniences will not subside.
Plus (and gawd I hate agreeing with the president) offshore drilling is safe.
Relatively of course.
And that this oil rig snafu is not like others which seem to be pipeline and tanker spills.
http://www.incidentnews.gov/famous
WSS
-
Is Panic Premature..........Unprecedented.
Gulf Oil Spill Is Bad, but How Bad?
By JOHN M. BRODER and TOM ZELLER Jr. Published: May 3, 2010
Print
Some experts have been quick to predict apocalypse, painting grim pictures of 1,000 miles of irreplaceable wetlands and beaches at risk, fisheries damaged for seasons, fragile species wiped out and a region and an industry economically crippled for years.
President Obama has called the spill “a potentially unprecedented - LOLOLOLOLOLOL
-environmental disaster.” And some scientists have suggested that the oil might hitch a ride on the loop current in the gulf, bringing havoc to the Atlantic Coast. Yet the Deepwater Horizon blowout is not unprecedented, nor is it yet among the worst oil accidents in history. And its ultimate impact will depend on a long list of interlinked variables, including the weather, ocean currents, the properties of the oil involved and the success or failure of the frantic efforts to stanch the flow and remediate its effects.
As one expert put it, this is the first inning of a nine-inning game. No one knows the final score.
The ruptured well, currently pouring an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf, could flow for years and still not begin to approach the 36 billion gallons of oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991. It is not yet close to the magnitude of the Ixtoc I blowout in the Bay of Campeche in Mexico in 1979, which spilled an estimated 140 million gallons of crude before the gusher could be stopped.
And it will have to get much worse before it approaches the impact of the Exxon Valdez accident of 1989, which contaminated 1,300 miles of largely untouched shoreline and killed tens of thousands of seabirds, otters and seals along with 250 eagles and 22 killer whales.
No one, not even the oil industry’s most fervent apologists, is making light of this accident. The contaminated area of the gulf continues to spread, and oil has been found in some of the fragile marshes at the tip of Louisiana. The beaches and coral reefs of the Florida Keys could be hit if the slick is captured by the gulf’s clockwise loop current.
But on Monday, the wind was pushing the slick in the opposite direction, away from the current. The worst effects of the spill have yet to be felt. And if efforts to contain the oil are even partly successful and the weather cooperates, the worst could be avoided.
“Right now what people are fearing has not materialized,” said Edward B. Overton, professor emeritus of environmental science at Louisiana State University and an expert on oil spills. “People have the idea of an Exxon Valdez, with a gunky, smelly black tide looming over the horizon waiting to wash ashore. I do not anticipate this will happen down here unless things get a lot worse.”
Dr. Overton said he was hopeful that efforts by BP to place containment structures over the leaking parts of the well will succeed, although he said it was a difficult task that could actually make things worse by damaging undersea pipes.
Other experts said that while the potential for catastrophe remained, there were reasons to remain guardedly optimistic.
“The sky is not falling,” said Quenton R. Dokken, a marine biologist and the executive director of the Gulf of Mexico Foundation, a conservation group in Corpus Christi, Tex. “We’ve certainly stepped in a hole and we’re going to have to work ourselves out of it, but it isn’t the end of the Gulf of Mexico.”
Engineers said the type of oil pouring out is lighter than the heavy crude spilled by the Exxon Valdez, evaporates more quickly and is easier to burn. It also appears to respond to the use of dispersants, which break up globs of oil and help them sink. The oil is still capable of significant damage, particularly when it is churned up with water and forms a sort of mousse that floats and can travel long distances.
Jacqueline Savitz, a senior scientist at Oceana, a nonprofit environmental group, said that much of the damage was already taking place far offshore and out of sight of surveillance aircraft and research vessels.
“Some people are saying, It hasn’t gotten to shore yet so it’s all good,” she said. “But a lot of animals live in the ocean, and a spill like this becomes bad for marine life as soon as it hits the water. You have endangered sea turtles, the larvae of bluefin tuna, shrimp and crabs and oysters, grouper. A lot of these are already being affected and have been for 10 days. We’re waiting to see how bad it is at the shore, but we may never fully understand the full impacts on ocean life.”
The economic impact is as uncertain as the environmental damage. With several million gallons of medium crude in the water already, some experts are predicting wide economic harm. Experts at the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies in Corpus Christi, for example, estimated that as much as $1.6 billion of annual economic activity and services — including effects on tourism, fishing and even less tangible services like the storm protection provided by wetlands — could be at risk.
“And that’s really only the tip of the iceberg,” said David Yoskowitz, who holds the endowed chair for socioeconomics at the institute. “It’s still early in the game, and there’s a lot of potential downstream impacts, a lot of multiplier impacts.”
But much of this damage could be avoided if the various tactics employed by BP and government technicians pay off in the coming days. The winds are dying down and the seas are calming, allowing for renewed skimming operations and possible new controlled burns of oil on the surface. BP technicians are trying to inject dispersants deep below the surface, which could reduce the impact on aquatic life. Winds and currents could move the globs of emulsified oil away from coastal shellfish breeding grounds.
The gulf is not a pristine environment and has survived both chronic and acute pollution problems before. Thousands of gallons of oil flow into the gulf from natural undersea well seeps every day, engineers say, and the scores of refineries and chemical plants that line the shore from Mexico to Mississippi pour untold volumes of pollutants into the water.
After the Ixtoc spill 31 years ago, the second-largest oil release in history, the gulf rebounded. Within three years, there was little visible trace of the spill off the Mexican coast, which was compounded by a tanker accident in the gulf a few months later that released 2.6 million additional gallons, experts said.
“The gulf is tremendously resilient,” said Dr. Dokken, the marine biologist. “But we’ve always got to ask ourselves how long can we keep heaping these insults on the gulf and having it bounce back. As a scientist, I have to say I just don’t know.”
Leslie Kaufman contributed reporting from New Orleans.
"God is great. Beer is good. People are crazy." -
Well, it's on the news that there has been a reaction plan put into affect
back in the 90's that used giant booms and scoop up equipment that could
each scoop up 1000 gallons ...
but the Obamao regime was asleep at the switch.
They STILL have not put that plan into action.
Instead, they smugly say it's BP's responsibility.
Another huge, huge indication that if Obamao and co.
didn't learn it in college, they don't know crap about real life
in America.
within the first couple of hours, the ALREADY EXISTENT federal plan
should have been dramatically initiated.
Weird. Bill Clinton gets found out concerning Monica Lewinski, and he launches missiles.
Reports/rumors are that Obamao has been said to possibly having an affair, and an oil well goes down.
Which, maybe the lefties figured would turn most of America against oil drilling.
Well, I was never for ocean drilling in the first stupid place,..
This Obamao regime stinks of corruption and UNConstitutional ideas that they seem to be putting into place,
if they can.
You can smell the Obamao regime stink in every single state of our United States.
blech !
-
Haha. I think you're on to something there, Cal.
-
Is Panic Premature..........Unprecedented.
Gulf Oil Spill Is Bad, but How Bad?
By JOHN M. BRODER and TOM ZELLER Jr. Published: May 3, 2010
Print
Some experts have been quick to predict apocalypse, painting grim pictures of 1,000 miles of irreplaceable wetlands and beaches at risk, fisheries damaged for seasons, fragile species wiped out and a region and an industry economically crippled for years.
President Obama has called the spill “a potentially unprecedented - LOLOLOLOLOLOL
-environmental disaster.” And some scientists have suggested that the oil might hitch a ride on the loop current in the gulf, bringing havoc to the Atlantic Coast. Yet the Deepwater Horizon blowout is not unprecedented, nor is it yet among the worst oil accidents in history. And its ultimate impact will depend on a long list of interlinked variables, including the weather, ocean currents, the properties of the oil involved and the success or failure of the frantic efforts to stanch the flow and remediate its effects.
As one expert put it, this is the first inning of a nine-inning game. No one knows the final score.
The ruptured well, currently pouring an estimated 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the gulf, could flow for years and still not begin to approach the 36 billion gallons of oil spilled by retreating Iraqi forces when they left Kuwait in 1991. It is not yet close to the magnitude of the Ixtoc I blowout in the Bay of Campeche in Mexico in 1979, which spilled an estimated 140 million gallons of crude before the gusher could be stopped.
And it will have to get much worse before it approaches the impact of the Exxon Valdez accident of 1989, which contaminated 1,300 miles of largely untouched shoreline and killed tens of thousands of seabirds, otters and seals along with 250 eagles and 22 killer whales.
No one, not even the oil industry’s most fervent apologists, is making light of this accident. The contaminated area of the gulf continues to spread, and oil has been found in some of the fragile marshes at the tip of Louisiana. The beaches and coral reefs of the Florida Keys could be hit if the slick is captured by the gulf’s clockwise loop current.
But on Monday, the wind was pushing the slick in the opposite direction, away from the current. The worst effects of the spill have yet to be felt. And if efforts to contain the oil are even partly successful and the weather cooperates, the worst could be avoided.
“Right now what people are fearing has not materialized,” said Edward B. Overton, professor emeritus of environmental science at Louisiana State University and an expert on oil spills. “People have the idea of an Exxon Valdez, with a gunky, smelly black tide looming over the horizon waiting to wash ashore. I do not anticipate this will happen down here unless things get a lot worse.”
Dr. Overton said he was hopeful that efforts by BP to place containment structures over the leaking parts of the well will succeed, although he said it was a difficult task that could actually make things worse by damaging undersea pipes.
Other experts said that while the potential for catastrophe remained, there were reasons to remain guardedly optimistic.
“The sky is not falling,” said Quenton R. Dokken, a marine biologist and the executive director of the Gulf of Mexico Foundation, a conservation group in Corpus Christi, Tex. “We’ve certainly stepped in a hole and we’re going to have to work ourselves out of it, but it isn’t the end of the Gulf of Mexico.”
Engineers said the type of oil pouring out is lighter than the heavy crude spilled by the Exxon Valdez, evaporates more quickly and is easier to burn. It also appears to respond to the use of dispersants, which break up globs of oil and help them sink. The oil is still capable of significant damage, particularly when it is churned up with water and forms a sort of mousse that floats and can travel long distances.
Jacqueline Savitz, a senior scientist at Oceana, a nonprofit environmental group, said that much of the damage was already taking place far offshore and out of sight of surveillance aircraft and research vessels.
“Some people are saying, It hasn’t gotten to shore yet so it’s all good,” she said. “But a lot of animals live in the ocean, and a spill like this becomes bad for marine life as soon as it hits the water. You have endangered sea turtles, the larvae of bluefin tuna, shrimp and crabs and oysters, grouper. A lot of these are already being affected and have been for 10 days. We’re waiting to see how bad it is at the shore, but we may never fully understand the full impacts on ocean life.”
The economic impact is as uncertain as the environmental damage. With several million gallons of medium crude in the water already, some experts are predicting wide economic harm. Experts at the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies in Corpus Christi, for example, estimated that as much as $1.6 billion of annual economic activity and services — including effects on tourism, fishing and even less tangible services like the storm protection provided by wetlands — could be at risk.
“And that’s really only the tip of the iceberg,” said David Yoskowitz, who holds the endowed chair for socioeconomics at the institute. “It’s still early in the game, and there’s a lot of potential downstream impacts, a lot of multiplier impacts.”
But much of this damage could be avoided if the various tactics employed by BP and government technicians pay off in the coming days. The winds are dying down and the seas are calming, allowing for renewed skimming operations and possible new controlled burns of oil on the surface. BP technicians are trying to inject dispersants deep below the surface, which could reduce the impact on aquatic life. Winds and currents could move the globs of emulsified oil away from coastal shellfish breeding grounds.
The gulf is not a pristine environment and has survived both chronic and acute pollution problems before. Thousands of gallons of oil flow into the gulf from natural undersea well seeps every day, engineers say, and the scores of refineries and chemical plants that line the shore from Mexico to Mississippi pour untold volumes of pollutants into the water.
After the Ixtoc spill 31 years ago, the second-largest oil release in history, the gulf rebounded. Within three years, there was little visible trace of the spill off the Mexican coast, which was compounded by a tanker accident in the gulf a few months later that released 2.6 million additional gallons, experts said.
“The gulf is tremendously resilient,” said Dr. Dokken, the marine biologist. “But we’ve always got to ask ourselves how long can we keep heaping these insults on the gulf and having it bounce back. As a scientist, I have to say I just don’t know.”
Leslie Kaufman contributed reporting from New Orleans.
Is Panic Premature..........Unprecedented.
Gulf Oil Spill Is Bad, but How Bad?
By JOHN M. BRODER and TOM ZELLER Jr. Published: May 3, 2010
Some experts have been quick to predict apocalypse, painting grim pictures of 1,000 miles of irreplaceable wetlands and beaches at risk, fisheries damaged for seasons, fragile species wiped out and a region and an industry economically crippled for years.
President Obama has called the spill “a potentially unprecedented - LOLOLOLOLOLOL
-environmental disaster.” And some scientists have suggested that the oil might hitch a ride on the loop current in the gulf, bringing havoc to the Atlantic Coast. Yet the Deepwater Horizon blowout is not unprecedented, nor is it yet among the worst oil accidents in history. And its ultimate impact will depend on a long list of interlinked variables, including the weather, ocean currents, the properties of the oil involved and the success or failure of the frantic efforts to stanch the flow and remediate its effects.
It is unprecedented for someone to take 8 the 9 days to make a decision.
Maybe the community organizer and chief should read the one minute manager.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login