The fig leaf
Joe Barton's "apology" to BP was symptomatic of what many conservative Republicans genuinely believe
The fig leaf
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Nobody should be fooled by Joe Barton's staged apology yesterday afternoon. Granted, the Texas Republican congressman disavowed his morning lament about how the Obama White House had engineered "a $20-billion shakedown" of poor old BP. And, granted, he said he wished to "retract" his morning statement that had reeked of sympathy for BP without offering a single syllable of sympathy for the people whose lives have been devastated by BP's behavior.
But let's not forget that what Barton said on national TV in the morning - "I’m ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday. I think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown, in this case a $20-billion shakedown" - is stark evidence of what he really believes. And it's significant that Barton's heart bleeds for BP, because if the Republicans do capture the House in the November elections (a distinct possibility), he's the guy who will chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The House Republican leaders were smart enough yesterday to recognize that Barton's slavish licking of the BP CEO's boots was politically embarrassing and that it reinforced the caricature of a Republican party in cahoots with Big Oil (especially given the fact that Barton's top financial benefactors since 1990 have been the oil and utility industries). Hence the pressure they put on Barton to apologize; he remains first in line to take over that committee only because he agreed to eat crow.
Nevertheless, the ritual apology tour was a tad bumpy. At first Barton merely voiced regret for how his morning remarks may have been "misconstrued." Only later he did he voice his alleged desire to "retract" everything he had said (including his comment about how "I do not want to live in a country" where an erring corporation can be forced to put up the money to make things right).
But here's the bottom line: The apology is just a fig leaf - not just for Barton, but for a large segment of the Capitol Hill GOP.
What Barton said to Tony Hayward at the outset of the energy committee hearing yesterday - and, more importantly, what the 100-member House Republican Study Committee said in a statement late Wednesday afternoon - is a testament to what GOP conservatives genuinely believe. What they believe is that any attempt to hold this corporation (or, as Barton put it, any corporation) fully accountable for damage wrought on regular people is nothing more than a shakedown...especially if Barack Obama deems it necessary.
Indeed, while the House GOP leaders came down hard on Barton yesterday, it's noteworthy that they have said squat about the Wednesday statement issued by the RSC, on behalf of its 100 House conservative members. Their take on the BP escrow fund is virtually identical to Barton's take - and they said it first. Here's a reminder of what the House conservatives crafted in their Wednesday email: "BP's reported willingness to go along with the White House's new fund suggests that the Obama administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics."
Why haven't the House GOP leaders demanded that the 100 conservatives apologize for that email? Because it's only an email, whereas Joe Barton was caught committing candor on camera. But the mentality is the same, and it can't be masked by a fig leaf. It's an intrinsic ingredient in the Republican brand, and the leaders' biggest regret yesterday is that it was publicly exposed at the worst possible time.
-------
The sole proprietor of this blog is on the road for the month of June. Virtually all June posts will be briefer than the norm, except on the rare weekdays when posts won't show up at all. Apologies in advance for this disturbance in the force. The standard verbosity will return on Monday, June 28.
Comments (128)
It was a extra-legal, Chicago-style shakedown of a private company in the White House by the President of the United States to create a executive branch managed slush fund. What is so hard to understand that it is not right & very un-presidential? It is par for the course, though:)— NEPhilly- No it's only wrong if you are a neocon and pray at the feet of Big Oil and the Chamber of Commerce. To the rest of us it was a wise and prudent move.
- As I sat watching Barton make those incredibly tone deaf comments yesterday I knew Boehner & Co had to be losing their minds. The GOP has been doing everything they can to paint Obama as weak willed & this boob states on camera that Obama was really Tony Soprano & beat up on big bad BP. Christmas comes early to Barack Obama!— yobill626
I guess the libs are going to keep going after what this knucklehead said in order to distract attention away from the failure in the White House. What a shame that after a disaster like Bush we end up with a disaster like Obama. His answer to our energy problem: More taxes. What else is new?
Barton's mistake was in directing his apology to BP and not the American people. BP deserves little sympathy, but that doesn't change the fact that what Obama has done to BP in extorting a $20B slush fund in indeed lawless.
Comment removed.- Tom re:Etheridge. The Youtube is all over the net. CBS and NBC outlets carried it. The local rags carried it. And Net news services carried it. Hardly "nary a word"— JimR
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Dog & Pony shows happen frequently & this guy is a 20 year vet. Not only is he tone deaf to what MOST Americans seem to feel (BP needs to pay), he initially wussed out on his retraction. Its not significant that Dems are beating up on him, but rather that members of his own party are doing so. Have you seen any 'Pubs get on camera & defend his remarks? You won't. Being the political animals that they (all) are, the Dems are going to use these comments as a saddle & ride them as long as they can. Incredibly dumb...— yobill626
- NEPhilly, you nailed it. I'm waiting for DP or Bunch to discuss how BO and Rahm ignored their own selected panel of engineers and imposed a drilling ban anyway. Think I should hold my breath? So much for the promise that policy would be based on sound science.— pj katauskas
- Comment removed.
- yobill, I didn't know you could put a saddle on a pig...;-)— yoda
- Now THAT would have topped barton's comments! I agree with you the whole thing was a joke. Those Congressmen acted like Heyward was standing on the deck when the well blew.— yobill626
- I was thinking the same thing bag o cheese - the kiss my behind part. Our Congress showed no class at all yesterday.— gone with the wind
- Heyward just doesn't help himself out in any way with his public replies. It is pretty amazing that guys that are such poor communicators like Heyward (& Barton to a lesser degree) could rise so high in his profession.— yobill626
When do the small people get their apology? Barton has apologized to BP, then apologized for his apology, but nothing for the small people? Bilbo, Frodo, Dopey, Sneezy, Grumpy (not me, the real Grumpy), etc. are all anxiously awaiting their apology.— one_eyed_jack- Maybe because Joe Biden told BP in the White House meeting yesterday, according to the NY Daily News,..."Svanberg also apologized to Obama during a businesslike meeting in the Roosevelt Room with company execs, but at that point still hadn't committed to financing a $20 billion fund to make victims whole. Enter Vice President Biden, the designated Bad Cop. Sources told the Daily News that Biden leaned forward and bluntly informed the Blight Brigade they had no choice: If they didn't do the right thing and put the cash in escrow, it would be done to them." Just sayin...— tom - wilmington, de
- From ABC News, June 17..."Eight days ago, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal ordered barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state's oil-soaked waters. Today, against the governor's wishes, those barges sat idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore. Sixteen barges sat stationary today, although they were sucking up thousands of gallons of BP's oil as recently as Tuesday. Workers in hazmat suits and gas masks pumped the oil out of the Louisiana waters and into steel tanks. It was a homegrown idea that seemed to be effective at collecting the thick gunk....But the Coast Guard ordered the stoppage because of reasons that Jindal found frustrating. The Coast Guard needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges. Fifty-nine days into the crisis, it still can be tough to figure out who is in charge in Louisiana, and the problem appears to be the same in other Gulf Coast states....The governor said the problem is there's still no single person giving a "yes" or "no." While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard's command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "It's like this huge committee down there," Riley said, "and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power."" Like Obama said, if you have any questions about his ability to manage a disaster, just look at how he managed his campaign...— tom - wilmington, de
- Now this is just too funny...Obama to George Stephanopolous about the health mandate.."STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it's a tax increase? OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion." The Dept of Justice in their argument to dismiss the Florida lawsuit against Obamacare.."To bolster its case, the DOJ cited the Anti-Injunction Act, which restricts courts from interfering with the government's ability to collect taxes. The Act, according to a DOJ memo supporting the motion to dismiss, says that "no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person, whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed." The memo goes on to say that it makes no difference whether the disputed payment it is called a "tax" or "penalty," because either way, it's "assessed and collected in the same manner" by the Internal Revenue Service." I thought the IRS was not going to be involved in the collection of any fines for not having health insurance? Lies, Lies and more lies.— tom - wilmington, de
- Tom, last time I checked, Obama managed his campaign to a win over a team of losers...and I think we're continuing to see the same movie over & over.— yoda
- Some people have criticized Obama's speech because it was too late; It wasn't near enough to the beginning of the crisis. Unfortunately folks this crisis is only at the beginning. The relief wells that everyone is putting their stock in are not going to stop the leak. The well is damaged further than what the newly "Transparent" government and BP is telling us. Once the relief wells are done oil will continue seeping out through the surface of the seafloor. Instead of one giant gusher it will be death by a thousand tiny gushers. We are going to be cleaning up crude oil from our beaches for decades, not years. And all thanks to the lax regulators of the Obama administration who accepted gifts from oil companies while they surfed the net.
- pj, the problem is it is all about politics and how things 'look' for this current administration. When you care more about how things look than actual results this is what happens, more speeches and nonsense 58 days after the dang thing blew & no discernable organized clean up effort by the feds. What makes it more incredible is that Pres. Obama skewered the Bush administration during the campaign on the Katrina fiasco & aftermath so you would think he would know better. Apparently our federal govt. is so overgrown with layers that a quick, steamlined federal govt. response is impossible even by a President who believes in the almighty power of the public sector, imho.— NEPhilly
- Yes, NEPhilly, Bo and friends just love optics and cosmetics. Forget about real leadership and substance.— pj katauskas
- Oh, and they really love rhetoric.— pj katauskas
- Dick misses the real point. Starting with Bush, the government has used its gigantic influence to get what it wants out of companies. Bush did this with Tarp. Now, Obama with th treat of a criminal prosecution has done it to BP, even if deserved. The question is do we want the government to act this way in the future and when should it? With Obama sinking like the Titantic, Dick and his ilk need something to change the story for Obama. An obsure Texas re3presentative that nobody cares about is not the opening they think it is.— CD75
- NE and Spock, the foundations for this mess were laid by 30 years of voodoo economics and blind worship at the altar of deregulation by the Republicans. It will take a lot longer than 1 1/2 years to repair the destruction caused by 30 years' worth of systematic sabotage of good government. I am hopeful, however, that Obama will have 6 1/2 more years to continue the repair job.— yoda
- I'm waiting for some white fisherman to say Obama doesn't care about white people. It's beginning to look that way because it's been 60 days and most of the small people haven't seen .10 from their government. I also believe Obama doesnt want to do anything that would make Bobby Jindal look good.— gone with the wind
- NEPhilly - You cannot have it both ways !!!! You were among those critical of Bush's TARP bailout and the BP fund goes a long way to make sure that the US Taxpayers will not be on the hook for BP's negligence. This fund goes a long way towards proving BP's words will be acted upon. Why the zeal to protect BP ???? Does not make sense.— FormerGOPer
- So there are like 500 people in congress. Under Dick's "gotcha" standard, if one irrelevant wacko says something stupid, it applies to everyone in same party. Careful Dick, that standard cuts both ways.— CD75
- yoda, that voodoo economics created 18 million new jobs in the 1980's so I will take a little voodoo economics about now with 9.7% unemployment:) As for regulation, the federal govt. can't do most things correctly so this should not be a surprise they can be bought off on this too no matter who is in charge. form, I am not protecting BP, but there are procedures and laws to be followed in making them pay & I'm sure there is no legal basis for this slush fund. I thought Congress was in charge of govt. spending, not a 'slush fund czar' in the executive branch. It may feel good, but to use the President's own word, it is an 'unprecedented' power grab by the executive branch & if GWB pulled this stunt the left would be howling, imho:)— NEPhilly
- FormerGOPer - Can't you see that the Democratic attack on business (since Obama was elected) is the reason that NO NEW JOBS are being created by the private sector? This healthcare monstrosity, Cap & Trade, his underhanded deals for unions - all ANTI BUSINESS! Now - we have a public humiliation of BP for a horrible ACCIDENT. Yes, they should and have said they will pay - we didn't need the Obama/Biden dumb and dumber team shaking them down for money. Who is going to create high paying jobs in this anti business environment?— gone with the wind
- yoda, my point was that managing his campaign is in no way training or indicative of how he would manage a disaster, which was Obama's point. Obama handled the question of his inexperience with challenging people to see how he managed his campaign and that he would bring that same management style and experience to the White House. Do you now believe they are comparable?— tom - wilmington, de
- Lord Puny: (from the last thread) Don't complain that I don't have the facts without at least doing a Google search, nimrod (action.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/102405). And the fact that some low level peons were charged and convicted shouldn't obscure the fact that their behavior was ignored by higher ranking officials.— p-diddy
- bagocheese: What exactly is "illegal" about the $20B escrow account. The Obama administration didn't legally compel them to do anything, BP agreed to it.— p-diddy
- gone with the wind: Yes, that monster bailout of Wall Street was truly anti-business. You guys can't keep your narratives straight half the time.— p-diddy
- Comment removed.
- diddy, that Wall Street bailout was anti-business in that the CEO's of the banks were in a room with Paulson and told they had no choice but to put their signatures on a bailout agreement. Wells Fargo CEO did not want the money, said they did not need the money, but had to accept the money. GM and Chrysler bondholders were characterized as greedy, even though all they wanted was what they were legally entitled. Instead, the UAW got what the bondholders should have received. Insurance companies were villified during the healthcare debate, and now we are finding out people will not be able to keep their plans, corporations are incurring billions in retiree benefit expenses, and the DOJ is arguing the mandate penalty is a tax after Obama swore it was not. Now, instead of accepting help from the 13 countries PLUS the UN that offered it and skimming the oil/cleaning the beaches, this administration is busy villifying BP (which deserves some villification) and planning a push for Cap & Tax. They are also letting other companies know that their priorities lie not in helping them but in demonizing them. I'd call that anti-business.— tom - wilmington, de
- diddy, as Biden told them, they either agreed to the $20 Billion or it would be done to them. Nothing coerced at all.— tom - wilmington, de
- Right. It IS perfectly legal for the government to work out a solution with BP. And if BP didn't think it was at least a fair deal, they would have said no. Why do you think they agreed to it? A truly fair remedy would be selling off BP's assets to pay for this catastrophe. BP should thank it's lucky stars they're still in business after this.— p-diddy
- Tom: I'm laughing. So you're in the "shakedown" camp? Good lord. If BP didn't think this deal was better than their other options, they wouldn't have agreed to it. We're talking about one of the ten largest private businesses in the world. Also, I admire the logical gymnastics required to turn the bank bailouts into an instance of "anti-business" policy. The government didn't take over the banks - they gave them money to keep them from going out of business.— p-diddy
- Private companies don't agree to pay $20 Bil for anything in 20 minute meetings unless something was said, please.— NEPhilly
- I keep waiting for one of the regulars to tell me how much better off we would be under the McCain/Palin adminstration.— Chris Landee
- tom: I think in some respects there are some comparisons. On the plus side, he's shown himself to be a thorough & thoughtful planner, taking a wide variety of viewpoints before taking action. On the minus side, he's shown himself to be rather slow off the mark more than once.— yobill626
- Chris, you are so right...Imagine how scary it would be to be getting our press conferences from Grandpa Zombie Eyes and the Half Term Hillbilly!— yoda
- NEPhilly: Not much needed to be said. Look at what they did.— p-diddy
- Comment removed.
- I think the problem the wingnuts are having here is that after having been screeching for weeks about how Obama has do JUST DO SOMETHING, now that he has actually done something to show that he is, in fact, in charge, they are terrified that people will actually approve of that. Hence the reeking hypocritical talking points (did those come from Beck or the Blimp?) about the rule of law from people whose only notion of law is that it applies only to other people, not to them.— yoda
- As for TARP, I said all those 'too big too fail' companies should have been allowed to fail for making bad bets. AIG for starters, the $182 Bil that went to AIG was funneled to largest banks foreign and domestic to pay 100% on their losses. 100%? TARP alos was a bad idea as now companies think they can be reckless and be bailed out by tax payers as Fannie and Freddie continue to be:(— NEPhilly
- Oh I see, the government can't work out deals with private companies that have caused environmental/economic disasters. In a way I agree with you. If the government had been ruthless, they would have gone through the courts and turned BP into a carcass. But that takes time (not to mention the will), and in the end it would not helped the affected region as much.— p-diddy
- p, I know what they did & they should pay, but I wonder if your mind would change if a highly partisan GOP administration was now in charge of a $20 Bil slush fund under the control of the executive branch of govt.?— NEPhilly
- NE, if Kenneth Feinberg was in charge of it I wouldn't have a problem - he did fine with the 9/11 fund under the most crooked, corrupt administration since Reagan, so I think he can handle the Obama administration too.— yoda
- BP has the financial wherewithal to take all comers in court, including the DOJ. They know that would be a PR disaster for them, so they're cutting their losses.— p-diddy
- NEPhilly: I'd see it the same way. My only problem with it is that it lets BP off too easy.— p-diddy
- p, that is correct, sue the bejesus out of them, but imagine if Dick Cheney created a $20 Bil fund from all the insurance companies after Katrina and appointed Scooter Libby to decide how the funds were to be doled out? Imagine that.— NEPhilly
- 2 whole days to this "big" story, Dick? Reminds me of Evan Thomas, Editor of Newsweek: 2007: "Our job is to bash the president [Bush], that’s what we do." 2009: "[Obama’s] sort of God."— CD75
- NEPhilly: Bad analogy. The insurance companies didn't cause a hurricane. Would you rather the DOJ sue BP in order to collect larger payments in perhaps 10,15,20 years? And it is only a "slush fund" because you don't like the Obama administration. You could call taxes a "slush fund" by that reasoning.— p-diddy
- And people still wonder why this nation went on a gun buying spree after these lawless Chicago thugs were elected to office.
- Lord Hum:I'll tell you why they went on a gun buying spree. Because whipping up support for gun rights is a good way to rally the Republican base, even though there is no congressional movement to revoke the 2nd amendment.— p-diddy
- Yeh Lord - I was one of them. Now it's becoming clearer to me everyday.— gone with the wind
- Gone with the wind: Typing from your backyard bunker?— p-diddy
- diddle - The whole idea of lawlessness is that the Constitution means nothing to these people. To Obama and those who think like him the Constitution is little more than dead words written by dead white guys that are totally irrelevant to the modern world we live in. Obama is acting as a dictator, subsuming the roles of the courts and the legislature into that of the executive. Only a stark-raving mad and blind partisan could be missing this.
- Lord Hum: There is nothing unconstitutional about the $20B escrow account. And there is no movement to revoke the 2nd amendment within congress. Holding people prisoner indefinitely without charges, that's unconstitutional.— p-diddy
- I don't care which side of the spectrum you stand on, Mitch McConnell's objection to a unanimous consent vote on a standalone extension of unemployment benefits is terrible for this country. Now they're just hoping that they can pass something by July 4th. You want to see an economy in recovery collapse? Take income away from 18 million people right when hiring is slowing and unemployment is rising again. The GOP is a farce.— HandNik
- p, not a perfect anoalogy but the insurance companies were going to pay anyway just like BP, but Cheney would be in charge. It is not about the money, it is about the power you gain by holding the purse strings & the executive branch is not equipped to handle it, imho.— NEPhilly
- We have to stop unending unemployment sometime. And if the dems were smart they would end it as it keeps unemployment artificially high, unless the idea is to keep as many people on the govt. dole as possible. Now I get it:)— NEPhilly
- The executive branch should stay out of alleviating a regional catastrophe? You make it sound like this money is going into Obama's checking account. The point is to get the money to people who need it quickly. What do you want, a congressional relief allocation debate taking place over a course of months? Considering what happened after the Exxon Valdez spill, this is a better plan.— p-diddy
- NEPhilly : so to summarize your (any many others') position, BP was forced to set up this escrow account, the administration ignored the constitution and broke innumerable laws that no one can actually name to force them to do so, yet ... BP would have happily paid all claims if just left alone?— still_independent
- By the way, if Cheney had worked out a deal with the insurance companies to obtain billions in pay outs to those who were swindled, I'd be all for it.— p-diddy
- Instead of all the ridiculous claims being made here, can't we all just get along? Seriously, though - why does everything have to be all or nothing? One side can't give the administration any credit, the other side can't allow it to receive no blame.... The Obama administration's response to this whole crisis has been weak at best. Rules and regulations need to be (carefully) waived in the event of a crises. They've been late in responding, and generally tepid when the did so. But some of the attacks haven't been fair or true either. First of all, some foreign assistance was accepted as far back as May (and it should be noted that some of the foreign offers of "help" have been to sell the US equipment they already had). There was nothing illegal in the setting up of the escrow account. Allowing the literally thousands of individual claims to wind their way through the courts will take more than a decade, and will cost BP even more money.... And Humungulous and gone with the wind: you guys are flat out terrifying. Why, exactly, did people need to rush out and buy guns? Hmmmm. I didn't need to protect myself against warrantless surveillance, declarations of enemy combatants, or even against fears of terrorism in general, but I need to buy a gun because ... ummm. my taxes might go back to where they were ten years ago. Wow.— still_independent
- diddy - I feel like I'm living the movie "Dr. Zhivago"!— gone with the wind
- No, still_independent, people went out and bought guns because it is still legal and they are justifiably concerned that it soon won't be. The rapidly growing unpopularity of Obama and his democratic majority in both houses has alleviated the concern a bit, but not much.
- still, I said it was extra-legal the way it was worked out. It has never been done before that I can remember, can you? BP said it was voluntary, so no laws were broken, unless Biden said to them, 'do this or it will be done for you' in his best Al Capone voice. If any one else but the federal govt. did that it would be illegal, but because the President does it is not. How Nixonian:) The President cheapened the presidency being seen in these negotiations, imho.— NEPhilly
- pdid, I'd be all for it if this admisitration was 'alleviating a regional catastrophe', but all they know how to do is sue, demonize and bully, not necessarily in that order:) Also, who exactly was swindled during Katrina, other than our gullible federal govt. that is?— NEPhilly
- He also cheapened the Presidency by saying he was sorry he couldn't suck up the oil with a straw! This guy has such a high opinion of himself - it makes me sick! And to diddy & independent - if Obama can just say he's suspending off shore drilling - don't you think that in his limitless powers he can just suspend gun sales if some "crisis" developed?— gone with the wind
- He also cheapened the Presidency by saying he was sorry he couldn't suck up the oil with a straw! This guy has such a high opinion of himself - it makes me sick! And to diddy & independent - if Obama can just say he's suspending off shore drilling - don't you think that in his limitless powers he can just suspend gun sales if some "crisis" developed?— gone with the wind
- "Overall, 41% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. That’s the lowest level of approval yet recorded for this president. Fifty-eight percent (58%) now disapprove." From Rasmussen Reports....................... So Obama's speech appears to have hurt him, as his poll numbers have dropped 5 points this week. As for Tony Haywards hearing yesterday I would say he stonewalled about as good as Robers Gibbs does when he dodging question about the job offered Joe Sestak. It was lawmakers getting a dose of their own medicine. And to be fair, Tony Hayward looked quite pathetic and basically insulted the intelligence of the American people. As for the 20 billion I have changed my mind a bit on that. If it prevents some litigation then it will be good to see victims compensated instead of trial lawyers. Cherio everyone- Have a great weekend.
- NEPHILLY!!! I am banning you from using smileys and "imho" or "imo" for a week! Just kidding of course. I know something we all can agree on. Fat Joe is not good at pitching this year. Now where is our famouse baseball mind, Talvenada?— puttinonthefoil
- Gone with the Wind: There is a constitutional amendment protecting the right to firearms. There is no such protection for off-shore drilling.— Chris Landee
- puttin, I understand, but sarcasm does come across better with a smiley face, imho:)— NEPhilly
- Right here I am , puttinonthefoil! The oil spill is a conse pub plot to invade Bermuda! mod lib dems don't see this but the questionable act is that Dick Cheyney is actually Tony Hayward coniving to blow up rigs so that Halliburton will get more cement contracts— Alvenada
- Diddy... you're having a good day today. Did you know why there were no Democrats on the wagon trains going West?. Well, they couldn't drive the connestogas, had to be a TEAMSTER, couldn't hunt for food as they were anti gun, couldn't clear any new land as that was not good for the environment, wouldn't take guard duty at night as they were anti war and anti gun. I'd say that was an unproductive group of people, yet we elect people just like them to run our government. Oh well, hope to see you soon in Florida— Phil Checchia
- What do we need a court system for anyway? Why don't we just force every corporation that wants to do business to establish an escrow account equal to three years of projected revenue? That way, if they mess up we'll simply be able to help those who get hurt without the red tape of the courts. And why don't we get rid of the legislature too? After all, in the incessant need to build a majority the system just ends up corrupt and sclerotic and passes bad laws anyway. And for that matter, why elect presidents? After all, all they do is tell a bunch of lies to get elected and then disappoint virtually everyone since they can't ever keep the promises they made. North Korea's Dear Leader is loved by his people. As is Cuba's Castro and Venezuela's Chavez, and as was Iraq's Hussein. What I read here is that some of the above posters are in love with the idea of an all powerful government run by a dictator, as long as they think they share the same politics as that dictator.
- I wonder if Barton's comment and the e-mail of the RSC will embolden BP to take a harder line against the Obama administration and all the "small people", or will they make the calculus that the PR disaster is such that a 20 billion escrow is a pill worth swallowing? Another aspect of this that is interesting is the need to keep BP as a viable company. I thought it was very prudent of Obama to mention that issue. The last thing we want is BP to be taken over by the Chinese or a Russian conglomerate now that their stock is in (or almost in) the junk category. I think Obama showed an excellent balance of tempered anger/frustration with BP, desire to achieve something concrete for the people in the Gulf, and understanding of the economic ramifications of sinking BP. While the pundits are having fun with the Oval Office speech, etc., I wonder how this is viewed by the residents of the Gulf. It has taken nearly two decades to make payouts from the Exxon Valdez disaster, yet within 60 days, Obama has established a mechanism to allow for prompt payout of claims in the Gulf--will the residents of the Gulf appreciate that, or are the pundits right and will this affair be viewed as a failure of government?— Nalaka
- Remember katrina when the government handed out debit cards to every Tom , Dick & Harry with a pulse. Gucci sales will be up now that the US Guv is handing out the money.— gone with the wind
- Nalaka: BP, even with the current nosedive of their stock, has a market cap of about $100B. That means that their "near junk" stock is now only worth a little less than half as much as Microsoft. They aren't going anywhere.— still_independent
- gone with the wind: "Obama can just say he's suspending off shore drilling ". No, he can say that the federal government isn't approving any new drilling permits. The executive branch of the federal government has oversight responsibility in granting drilling rights, as given to them by congress. Obama is simply exercising those rights, in full compliance with the powers given him to congree under the constitution. While I may (and do) disagree with the decision, is it completely appropriate for him to make it.— still_independent
- still independent - Obama couldn't suck the oil with a straw but he's going to be damn sure he sucks every last dime out of BP. This is going to drag on and on and on - and BP will be drained of money and oil by the time it's over. Obama will be using BP money to look for sources of "green energy". Anything and everything will be blamed on BP.— gone with the wind
- Love all the frighties posting here. BP's CEO basically read his corp's PR ad before Congress. He is the head honvo, the buck stops with him. To say he wasn't in the loop is pure BS. All this info coming out now proves that Hayward and BP couldn't give a damn about people or the environment, just profits. It has been fined dozens of times and many of its workers have died in their refinery fires and on the oil well platform. Let's not forget 11 men will never be found. Sick of Barton and the other repubs saying we should let the courts decide, when they all seem to be against courts deciding anything else. It took about 20 years of litigation after the Exxon Valdez disaster to settle and the SC struck down a major portion of the payout to Alaska. You remember, the SC court case Gov. Palin couldn't think of during the '08 campaign? The decision that was handed down just a few weeks before Couric asked her the question? The repubs are hoping that BP can drag litigation out for decades while the American citizens most affected by BP's criminal actions either die off or just give up trying to be made whole for lost income and lost lives.— mike l
- gone with the wind: really? Exactly how much of the $20B is going to the federal government?— still_independent
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- diddy, no, he did not take over the banks. By the way, what is it Kenneth Feinberg was appointed as....the "pay czar"? What is his primary responsibility...to regulate the pay at banks and financial companies? Nah, Obama did not literally take them over. As for how much of the $20 Billion the fed gov't will get, that depends on how many people Feinberg hires to adjudicate all the claims. I doubt he is going to do that all by his lonesome and for free, so just how big a staff do you think he will need? What will his pay scale be like? Will they get health benefits, pensions, 403(b) match? Are these logical questions? Obama has requested $15 million for his "commission" looking into the explosion...the commission that contains not one person from the oil industry, but does have environmentalists and people from academia. Gee, I wonder what they will report?— tom - wilmington, de
- Meanwhile, back at the Fantasy Land Ranch, Obama was at the podium in Ohio touting the fantastic effects of the stimulus in a state with 10.7% unemployment. The workders at the plant Obama visited were also all sent home without pay (and several businesses were made to close) as a result of his visit. I bet they all appreciated that. Nevada has just surpassed Michigan as the state with the highest unemployment rate in the country...that should give Harry Reid a boost in the polls. First time unemployment claims jumped last week to 472,000. Hillary told Ecuadorian television that Obama instruced the DOJ to sue Arizona over their immigration law (which 58% of those polled support). None of the network news outlets reported the Congressman Bob Etheridge assault on a student who asked him a question, but they all reported Carly Fiorina commenting on Barbara Boxer's hair as being "so yesterday". Obama and Biden are also embarking on a "summer of stimulus" tour to brag about all the economic benefits of their stimulus bill. No word if "teleprompter" is also going along.— tom - wilmington, de
- Great column from Krauthammer...http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/17/AR2010061704209.html— tom - wilmington, de
- Comment removed.
- The really sad thing is that President Disappointment missed the opportunity to nationalize BP in the name of national security. He made the same mistake last year by failing to take over those "too big to fail" banks. Seizure of assets is the only language corporate criminals understand.— Delaware Jim
- I thought the GOP believed in personal responsiblity, apparently it does not apply to BP.— borncynic
- Interesting that Republicans are fine with BP's negligence and their "promise" to pay claims. lol, we all know if Obama didn't get the 20 BILLION, the taxpayers picking up the cost.— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine, 20 billion in an escrow account does nothing to stop the spill or clean it up before it reaches the beaches. Trying to score political points off the comments of one person says more about the left and what they really care about it. POLITICS! I would prefer the President use the international help to clean up the oil and ask that all remaining oil rigs begin drilling relief wells. Upon completion deep water drilling could then resume. Now that would be a solution instead of this daily banter of scoring cheap political points. and judging by the tracking polls it isn't working as Obama's approval are at all time lows. Rasmussen has him at 41%- lowest ever. Lofty rhetoric was fine on the campaign trail but it will only get this president so far. It has led us to a malaise and many voters are growing increasingly tired of rhetoric with no action.
- Tom- That was a good column from Krauthammer. The bloom is off the rose on the lofty rhetoric for sure.
- swedes is crying like a typical Republican. You support Drill Baby Drill, but not the efforts to clean up the Gulf. Disgusting!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- I don't understand, Frank Luntz has instructed Republicans to refer to the spill as a "natural disaster". Guess this an attempt to deflect some blame from BP. I hear many blaming poor government oversight which is ironic coming from a group that would abolish most oversight if given the opportunity. Shame on BP and the government officials who approved the response plan. An investigation shows that the plan was a cut and past job which refers to sea lions, otters and walruses as "senitive biological resources" in the gulf. And what's wrong with taking political advantage. If the administration can fix the problem and score political points at the same time... duh. A few years back the Bush administration used the events of 9/11 as fuel for the invasion of Iraq...a neocon pipe dream long before 9/11. Both parties have been using events for political advantage for generations. On the other hand, anyone who believes that the BP explosion or 9/11 were "inside jobs" is going a bit too far.— Rabe56
- Uh Oh!. IPCC consensus on climage change was a phony according to IPCC insider. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/06/13/the-ipcc-consensus-on-climate-change-was-phoney-says-ipcc-insider/
- Is the National Post a conservative publication?— Rabe56
- Rabe56- why don't you just read what Mike Hulme of East Anglia wrote instead of trying to squirrel your way out of it by saying the national post is a right wing publication.?
- The fundamentals- huh? reading comprehension isn't your thing is it? Why would say I do not support efforts to clean up the gulf? Here is a quote from my post " I would prefer the President use the international help to clean up the oil ".......... I guess you want to play the MSNBC game, where you make your own translation then spend the rest of your time bashing me for something I never said in the first place.
- Mike, there is no reason to use the insulting term "squirrel" to describe me. My point is that, there are probably many articles written and published from a different perspective. I don't care to read the article. Mike, I must confess that I read for a living at work and in my spare time I tend to read things that reinforce the way I see the world and I don't see it through the lense of the National Review or Rush Limbaugh. And I'm not saying you do but the whole global warming thing is right versus left. The scientists are in the middle. When I retire I'll find more time to read and become more well rounded. I think a step in the right direction for me would be to read more and stop wasting time making unsolicted comments.— Rabe56
- Rabe- Fair enough. Have a great weekend
- I agree with all the Republican posters here. Tony Hayward is a true "merican" hero. His lack of oversight of his company resulted in a great outcome for all businessmen large and small. I think we should pass the hat and raise 20 billion to replace the money Obama stole. Tony is an inspiration to us all. (I can't wait to see Palin et al use that kind of logic when they campaign)— kathy in blue bell
- Swedesboro: Don't worry, I hear the president is going to swim to the ocean floor tomorrow and plug the with a massive boulder, using his super strength and ability to breath underwater.— p-diddy
- Comment removed.
- swedes is crying again. close you legs, your mangina is showing!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- The Fundamental- You don't bring much political thought to the table. I doubt this board is going to be for you if this is all you got.
- Pdiddy- No one is asking Obama to begin a deep sea diving career. We are just asking him to be a leader and mobilize clean up plans. Accepting the help of ship skimmers from other countries. Clearly this is a man who is used to getting by on rhetoric. The act had grown quite tiresome and his poll numbers reflect that.
- It's just plain sad that swedes has "empathy" for BP but not the Gulf fisherman. I think we know why he hates America.— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- Tony H is being villified on TV this morning - lead story on 6ABC because he went to a yacht race but Obama has been singing with celebs at the White House, going to ball games, and golfing. What a leader - yet he gets a free pass. Now Ram is on bragging about their biggest accomplishment in this mess - getting $20 billion from BP!! How about cleaning up the oil? Shouldn't that have been their first priority? And fundamental - if you don't think this delay in the cleanup isn't going to eventually cost the US taxpayer - you're delusional. There are going to be damages to our economy from this that will be impossible to calculate. Why do you think Nutter is going down to LA? He's looking to see how much he can get for seafood businesses in Philly!! The first priority of the Obama administration should have been to do everything to prevent the spread of the oil - not how much they can get to clean up. It will be years before this is cleaned up now.— gone with the wind
- The Fundemental: Do not make a fool out of yourself. Please provide for me a quote that shows I have empathy for BP?
- Comment removed.
- BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html#ixzz0rPJfD2Vn
- Comment removed.
- Why is the Republican leadership silencing "Righteous Joe" Barton? Please Joe, tell all the folks on the gulf coast how they should feel about BP while you sit in sh*ttown, TX. The GOP is a disgrace!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- tom: do you have nay link for "The workders at the plant Obama visited were also all sent home without pay " ?— still_independent
- swedesboromike : you posted a link to the same article about a week ago. And from your article, which party received more $$ from BP?— still_independent
- swedesboromike: I guess I'm trying to ask you - so what? Which is it? Is Obama going easy on BP, because $70k of the over hundreds of millions he's raised came from BP, or is he "shaking them down"? At least try to be consistent.— still_independent
- swedesboromike: " Uh Oh!. IPCC consensus on climage change was a phony according to IPCC insider". Not to get preachy, but source material, source material, source material. Follow your own link, and go to the actual paper that article is referring to (it's linked towards the bottom). Not shockingly, that's not what the author of the paper says, nor was it his point. He is looking at the IPCC's tendency to try and build consensus, and the pros and cons of doing it that way. I warn you, though, that the paper, while not that long, is a really boring read.— still_independent
- Nothing left to argue here so, I hope all the dads had a good 'special' day. Tomorrow it's back to being just 'the dad'.— JimR
All about the money still. 'Shakedown' of BP?? Scroo BP, they are destroying our Gulf. If Obama were any kind of leader, BP who only hold a lease there, would have been EVICTED, weeks ago. Obama would have held a confab drawing on the expertise of all the world's experts to come up with a range of solutions for GETTING THAT OIL SHUT OFF and they would be down there trying them until one works. GET THE OIL STOPPED first THEN worry about the money. In the meanwhile Bammy and the Congress have no problem finding hundreds of billions in Porkulus to blow on such vital projects as planing street trees in Poughkeepsie. If BP doesn't reimburse voluntarily, seize their da mn assets.— phluphya19147
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: