That, my dear Rioters, is a direct quote from this article in the Los Angeles Times. It talks about how BP - the most hated company in America right now - is trying yet another time to cap the leaking oil well. This time they're attempting to fit a 'snug-fitting cap' on the top, which would direct 60,000-80,000 barrels to four container vessels.
Would this be a permanent solution? No, but it would definitely help out until the promised relief well can be finished. Of course, I'm pretty curious as to where this number of 60,000-80,000 barrels to be collected came from. My guess? BP. And if that's true, then I'm not really too keen on believing it.
However, Steve Kloor, a citizen in the area of New Orleans, summed up what everybody's feeling:
Kloor said he had no choice but to root for BP and hope for the best. "Do I have confidence?" he said. "Sure, I have to — it's the only hope I have."
All we know now is that the next step is to attempt getting that cap on, and that isn't expected to happen until Wednesday. Hopefully, I'll have good news to report by then.
In other news that has yet to play out: The federal government is suing the state of Arizona. Guess why! Yes, this news is about a week old, but I was hoping something would be worth reporting before I wrote about it on the blog. There's not.
Here's the rundown. Attorney General Eric Holder is arguing on behalf of the federal government that Arizona law SB 1070 (their immigration reform bill) is 'inconsistent with our federal constitution.' Governor Jan Brewer called the suit 'outrageous.' Opponents of the suit say this is being done for moral reasons, as this kind of legislation will inevitably lead to racial profiling - which is more a civil rights issue than a legal/constitutional one. However, proponents of the lawsuit say it is unconstitutional.
In defense of the opponents, I would like to say I don't like how the government isn't specifically detailing how the law is unconstitutional. The Attorney General seems content to merely say it is. Alternatively, from a legal perspective, I can see how not laying out your case in public is a smart legal move.
In the original article, there's a quick yes or no quiz you can take on whether you think SB 1070 is constitutional or not. As of this posting it was 77% yes and 23% no. This bill does have a lot of support around America. Many Americans are quite upset that the federal government hasn't fixed the serious problem of immigration reform. And, while the AG is suing the state of AZ, he does say he understands that immigration reform needs to occur.
"I understand ... the frustration of the people of Arizona and the concerns that they have with regard to the amount of illegal immigration that occurs....But the solution that the Arizona legislature came up with is inconsistent with our federal constitution."
I think you all know that I agree with that sentiment. However, I'd like to hear from YOU! Let me know your thoughts on immigration reform in general. Did Arizona do the right thing? Do you believe the federal government needs to hurry their ass up on fixing immigration law, or should more states create vigilante laws with potentially discriminatory practices? Or is there a secret option C you think is available? Comment, tweet, or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com.
Love and Lyte,