Just cause I feel like defending Gov. Barbour...

I've been holding off on this, but finally I've decided I have to say something for Mississippi, mainly because I've seen a lot of people who are blasting Governor Barbour for not meeting with President Obama when he makes his various photo-ops to the Coast.

I love my home state of Mississippi, and I understand the finger pointing at first, asking what Governor Barbour is thinking... however, let's point out that Mississippi and Al/La/FL are three entirely different situations.


First let's point out that fortunately, the Mississippi Coast has been fortunate.   First and foremost, the tides and winds have spared _most_ of the Mississipi Coast.   So far, there's been very little more than tar-balls on the Barrier Islands.   Louisiana, Florida (and to a lesser extent, Alabama) don't have that advantage, so it's much more important for those governors to get an immediate response from the President.

Whereas Louisiana has a major eco-locations in the wetlands, Mississippi is fortunate enough to have most of their eco-areas more inland and along the Mississippi River, so the issue is that by the time the MS wetlands are hit, we will already be at worst case scenario (IMO).

Unlike Florida, who's beaches are right on the gulf of Mexico, they have much less protection from any incoming spill.    So they have to keep on things, because their beach tourism is INSTANTLY crippled by any major flood of oil.   Mississippi's man-made beach, again, with the island protection, is still healthy and intact.  (Yes, the Barrier Island beaches -could- get buried.. but I"ll get to that in a minute).

Alabama I can understand, because if that oil gets into Mobile Bay (I'd have to look to see if there are any islands between Mobile Bay and the Gulf to be 100% sure)... That's a monster mess that's going to affect the ENTIRE southern half of Alabama in a very short time.   Mississippi is fortunate in another regard, as the Mississippi River is "blocked" off in part by the pennisula of Louisiana. 

So why shouldn't Barbour suggest people continue to come to the coast...  in fact, according to the Clarion Ledger:

The impact of the oil spill to Mississippi is most noticeable onshore.

"It is killing our economy down here because people are not risking their vacation time or money to come here on the chance oil will be here," McDaniel said.

Julie Thomas, a bartender and hostess at a local restaurant, said tourist-related industries are suffering.

"It's spring, right after school, and the Mississippi Gulf Coast is supposed to be hopping," Thomas said. "It's not. I don't care what anyone says, this place is dead.

What's Barbour supposed to say?  Don't come here, where you can still enjoy the sun and beaches and the local cuisine?   No.. he's saying exactly what needs to be said... "Folks, we're still here, we're still able to give you southern hospitality, it's safe to visit.  Mississippi wants you here."


The Mississippi coast lives and thrives on its tourism, both on the beach and _off_ and Barbour's doing everything he can to make sure it continues. 

Okay, so are you with me so far?   Because I'm going to get to the heart of the matter shortly (along with something that I do disagree with Barbour with)...

Back on May 26th, Haley Barbour spoke with Wolf Blitzer

Well, it is, Wolf. You know, it's -- what has happened with the well is a terrible thing. And we feel awful for our neighbors in Louisiana, because they have had a lot of oil and -- and emulsion get in their lands. But we haven't had, really, any impact. I mean, we haven't had enough oil hit Mississippi's beaches to fill up a milk jug. Now, we're prepared and we're prepared for the worst.

 So, preparations were already underway in Mississippi... What ? Someone getting their state prepared before hand.

Well, there's no question that we're at risk. And the tides and the winds and -- have blessed us. And Louisiana, of course, is much closer to the well site than we are. And we feel terrible that we are trying to help them any way we can and any resources that we can make available to them.

Note again, Mississippi is using their resources to help out another state... Yes, they could be making sure everything is available for MS only, but Wow!! Good-Neighborism from an "evil Republican" governor.

Now comes the key paragraphs:

We are prepared in Mississippi. We have a multi-layered defense to defend our shores. We've got hundreds of vessels that are ready to go.

Prepared and ready!!   Who'd have thought that?  But Blitzer asked to be 100% sure that Barbour wasn't just blowing hot air...

BLITZER: When you say you're prepared for that worst case scenario, what are you doing?

BARBOUR: Well, we have about 750 vessels that are -- that we're in the process of training. Most of them have been trained now, with their crews, to fight the oil off our barrier islands, then to try to prevent it from getting between the passes, between the barrier islands, keep from getting into the Mississippi Sound.

Note they didn't say we were waiting for someone to approve this training... we didn't want for the govt to say, okay, the EPA/NOAA says you can train crews.. they went out and TRAINED crews.

Some of it undoubtedly will, if it comes our way -- enough comes our way. Then we will try to clean it up and deal with it while it's in the Sound, where we think it will sort of be like a washing machine going back and forth between the -- the beaches and the barrier islands.

Okay, this one is a little bit of hopeful thinking by Barbour, but it's one theory that might work with the geography of Mississippi (again, something her brethren states won't have the advantage of).

Heavily, we will defend the mouths of the bays and the areas that have fragile wildlife habitat on the beach. Most of our habitat is in the bays, is in a little bit, is up the rivers. And so the fourth line of defense, that is the one right at the mouth of the bay, the mouth of the river, the mouth of the bayous, that is the next to last line of defense -- a critical line of defense.

If something gets past there, we will try to clean it up in the bays without harming the marshlands. As you know, there's a real risk that trying to clean it up could actually make things worse.

Note as I sated, Mississippi's geography is fortunate, as the habitats are further inland.   But notice that Barbour is "picking" the battlegrounds.  Like a general, if you have a hill you can defend.. you defend that hill.

While the oil is out in the gulf, the Federal govt is the one that's best equipped to deal with the oil... that's what hte EPA is for, right?   If it gets closer to the Mississippi islands, then the state gets in and get  down and dirty... In fact, Barbour pointed out , that is his most critical line of defense.   That's where his attention is going.

Now for the final part...

BLITZER: Are you getting all the help you need from the federal government?

BARBOUR: We have. BP has never said no to any requests we have made. Now, some requests we've made they haven't been able to perform. But they have never said no. The federal government, whether it's the Coast Guard or whomever, has worked hard with us. Like I say, they're giving a lot more attention to Louisiana and should be.

But we are satisfied that they're trying as hard as they can and that they are being very cooperative. I'm not going to complain.

Whoops.. someone asked BP to help out?    Hm... what happened to that "BP is doing nothing?"    Hell, Gov. Barbour even said the federal govt is acting when asked... (now THAT's Saying something).

Now I will disagree him on the  following though:

And I am -- I'm not going to criticize the government when they are dealing with something literally unprecedented and it's like trying to do brain surgery a mile deep on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

This is one of those statements he makes that I would disagree with him on, although I see where he's going.  The Democrats constantly (wrongly) criticized President Bush for not acting immediately following Katrina, so much govt time was taken up answering the criticisms instead of performing further actions.

After the entire spill is cleaned up and resolved, then I could see some critiques/criticisms coming, although I've always believed in the "squeaky wheel gets the grease" (as has been shown in this instance), so I do have a difference of opinion with Governor Barbour there.


Now let's move forward shall we.. just one week later.  June 3rd.

Gov. Haley Barbour said he's asked BP PLC and the White House to put more boats off the Mississippi Coast to intercept oil after a two-mile slick of crude washed up Tuesday on a barrier island.

Barbour said he doesn't want to be surprised again.

He said Wednesday the White House and BP promised to provide more vessels near the state's barrier islands to protect them from encroaching oil.

And you know, as of today, Barbour's response has been working:

Officials monitoring the Alabama and Mississippi coasts have not seen any new oil wash ashore, a representative of the Incident Command Center said today

So consider a bit of lady luck and a PROPER response by Governor Barbour.   Now would the same response work for the other states?  Of course not... but i can only hope that the other states are getting the responses and actions _they_ need to deal with this, but don't chastise someone who's response and actions _have_ worked so far.