The World's Greatest Snake Oil Show
When two heads of state — oops! make that three — take great pains to assure us that BP is not influencing political events for private gain while pointedly rejecting calls for an investigation, you can be sure of one thing: BP is influencing political events for private gain.
_____________________________________________________
"Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills"
is Obama's "Mission Accomplished".
_____________________________________________________
"Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills"
is Obama's "Mission Accomplished".
_____________________________________________________
Whatever the case, there's bound to be political fall-out from tripping over yourself to defend the currently evillest Corporation on the planet (they burn sea turtles alive, for the love of God!), and looking like an impotent toady to the all-powerful oil regime.
Obama's already in over his head. Instead of "killing the well", the President, who was for deep-water drilling before he was against it ("Oil rigs today generally don't cause spills" is his "Mission Accomplished"), chose first of all not to enforce existing laws, second to give the oil lobby more, and finally — and worst of all — chose to sit by while BP dithered for three months trying to find a way to suck out the oil for profit rather than shut down the well, period.
What I see when I look at the terrible events of this long, hottest summer on record is an oily conspiracy of unbridled greed covered up (and not very convincingly) by a two-bit snake oil show.
I used to think that it couldn't get worse than the Bush-Cheney regime, with their naked contempt for the public good in pursuit of profit. But this is so much darker and more insidious, because you realize that it doesn't matter who's in office.
Obama may wring some meager concessions out of the corporations running the show, but it's BP's world, baby. We just live in it. (But at least if you're reading this, you're probably not a sea turtle.)
I agree. The longer I'm alive, the more I realize it's not the President who has any control, nor the congress-critters we elect to represent us. There's a much larger force behind it all, and it can be found in boardrooms across the globe. I know that may sound all conspiracy-theorist, but seriously, the longer I'm around, the more valid that argument becomes, to me.
My disappointment with the President only goes so far. My biggest disappointment is with the people in Congress, and how they carry themselves. Those, for me, are the people to watch.
Oh, and Michelle Obama. I really like her. Far more than any Barbara or Laura I've ever met.
Reply to this
Corporations are concerned with their management, their profits, and their investors generally in that order. It may be comforting in some strange fashion to hope for a "larger force behind it all", yet greed and self-interest, human or corporate, rarely coincide to the benefit of all. There is truly a limit to what corporations can do to influence events, otherwise all the non-profits with ensuring good corporate deeds on their agendas would prevail more often. Our dear Count Tolstoy has a wonderful explication of the results of Napoleon's invasion of Russia in "War and Peace" (it's somewhere in the middle, I seem to recall). The short answer is that the farther one is from the action, the less control and responsibility one has. The idyllic system for the U.S. is participatory democracy as in Greek city state; the experiential is representative oligarchy as in modern industrial state. I never expected Obama to do too much: his personal reality and rise to power preclude truly actualized leadership. If he has more than one term, I'll be surprised. I'd like to see Michelle take more active stances, rather than merely appear to be seen advocating child obesity or reduction in sugar intake. Her mother's taking care of the kids, and they attend school, so there's really no excuse for her not being in the public eye more. After all, with far more inhibitions than Mrs. Obama has ever exhibited, Eleanor Roosevelt managed to conquer her fears and speak to and for a nation...as an American woman for everyone.
Reply to this
If BP brokered a deal to have the Lockerbie bomber released in exchange for drilling rights in Libya, which is the charge here, it's influencing politics in ways that are more insidious than mere profit motive. And if they can influence heads of state in a liberal democracy to cock-block an investigation, a conspiracy (which is, after all, just an "an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot") is not really so-o-o-o far-fetched, is it?
Reply to this
OK, since I failed the test of actually reading the article link, I'll say, Yeah, BP's probably scum; the money and contracts were more important than justice. Still I believe liberal democracies are too messy for this sort of cloak-and-daggar stuff: they simply ooze leaks. And, Mike, don't you always check beneath a Scotsman's kilt anyway? As Ronnie Reagan said, Trust but verify!
Reply to this