These are indeed remarkable days. I can think of few times in recent history when the most fundamental problems of our civilization have been more obviously placed on display. This oil gusher in the Gulf – practically a non-story when it began – has captivated the nation, providing a gross illustration of the true costs of our current energy regime. Who can deny that this disaster was caused by a headlong rush for short-term profit, an obsession with minimizing costs, and a total disregard for human and environmental consequences? That is the model for oil development in the United States and elsewhere. And with this oil-cano spewing endlessly into an extremely sensitive biosystem, the actual costs of this enterprise simply cannot be concealed. There are spills and toxic contamination all the time, but you rarely see it or hear about it. This time is different. This time, the sludge is coming to us.
What, objectively, can our government do? Well, a lot more, it seems. Our regulatory mechanisms are mere appendages of the industries they are charged with overseeing. In many cases – such as with the Minerals Management Service- that was the intention. We’ve also just come off of a long period – eight years – of having former oil industry executives in charge of the government. That greatly enhanced the culture and practice of “hands off” regulation specific to that industry – an approach that was generalized to the rest of the economy. So the first thing that needs to be said about this crisis is that it is in large part another parting gift from George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Just add that to the pile, right next to the financial crisis, the Citizen’s United Supreme Court decision, the continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so on. What’s next?
That said, there is little point in defending the Obama administration on this score. His appointment of energy industry favorite Ken Salazar as Secretary of Interior was on par with making Tim Geitner Treasury Secretary. Small wonder the Minerals Management Service, already publicly reviled for its cartoon-like symbiotic relationship with extractive industries, has been allowed to remain essentially unreformed up to this point. Were they waiting until a second term to get started on this? Or were they just carrying on what their predecessors had established, with a smiley face slapped on the side for good measure? Apparently the latter. Aside from some relatively muted trash talk, they’ve done little to force BP and the rest of the industry to change their behavior.
We’ve got bipartisan consensus on one thing: offshore drilling must continue. Why? Because it’s making boatloads of money for the suits. Why else?
luv u,
jp
That was the last dose of goofiness. The most recent one was on Israel’s attack on a Turkish relief ship heading for Gaza, during which the IDF killed 9 people on board. Of course, in Krauthammer’s view, the attack was completely justified, taking up the usual line that the Israeli government has been following – Hamas has fired 6,000 or 7,000 rockets into Israel. Leaving aside the omission of any accounting of Israeli munitions fired at Gazans over a comparable period (with much greater human effect), Krauthammer proceeded to defend not only Israel’s blockade, but its occupation of all of the territories it seized in 1967 (including the Sinai) and its occupation of southern Lebanon for almost twenty years. You see, these were not occupations but forward defensive positions. Even long after anything that might be realistically termed a standoff or state of war existed between Israel and its immediate neighbors Egypt, Jordan, or Lebanon. So that should clear THAT up.
Such obfuscation is more effective with today’s all-volunteer military, but back when the draft was running at full steam, it was a much harder sell. When you are literally forcing people to go to war, your praise tends to ring a bit hollow. Of course, our volunteer military is forced, technically speaking – they have no choice but to go, even if they merely joined up for the promise of college tuition. But unlike the 60s and prior, this is not a broadly-experienced phenomenon. Back then, masses of young people were threatened with deployment and particularly in the case of Vietnam, many were sent against their will. In that circumstance, there’s a strong incentive to examine the policy very closely. Many did, and didn’t like what they found.
It’s also clear that this spill was the result of negligence in the extreme; of greed carried to a fatal crescendo. BP and its hirelings were in a tremendous hurry and cut corners drastically. Combine that with the obvious fact that these people do not know how to deal with a well blow-out one mile under the surface and you have the makings of an environmental crime of historic magnitude. You also have the crime of manslaughter, at least, with the deaths of 11 workers in that initial explosion (the photographs of which are flabbergastingly reminiscent of World War II naval battle photography). As with the pirates who own Massey Energy, BP execs must be held accountable, as well as the contracting firms that aided them.
So was Rand Paul’s victory in Kentucky, against an establishment candidate avidly supported by Cheney, McConnell and others. While Paul has gotten himself tangled into knots with some absolutist libertarian positions, he shares his father’s disdain for both of our useless wars. That, at least, would be an embarrassment for his party… and a well-deserved one, at that. He would also be one of the only truly anti-war senators. Hard to fault him for that.
These companies are falling all over themselves trying to limit their liability. Not surprising, but quite honestly, why should they be allowed to do anything of the sort? Is anyone going to limit the liability of every living thing along the Gulf coast? Can a limit be placed on how much people, birds, fish, an entire ecosystem, in fact, will be allowed to suffer? And what the hell happens when we try to place a limit on how much companies like BP can take in profits? Excess profit taxes always raise cries of socialism, unjust takings, etc. These guys have been making billions hand over fist for the last few years in particular with no limits whatsoever. But liability for a massive catastrophe like this – that can be limited, somehow? Ludicrous beyond belief.
Well, it is a Lieberman idea. He and retired male model Scott Brown have put this piece of garbage forward rather proudly, despite the fact that it is a.) almost certainly unconstitutional and b.) such a rabid overreaction to what has occurred that it can only be understood as a political stunt rather than any matter of conviction. What is it with these people, anyway? Where do they get this deep-seated hostility towards our legal system and our traditions regarding the rights of the accused? Are they originally from authoritarian countries and just homesick? It’s like the people in my neighborhood who chop down all of their trees – if they want to live in Kansas, why don’t they MOVE to Kansas? And if Lieberman wants to live in North Korea or Mexico, they’ve certainly got room for him there.
Also… this is threatening some of the most sensitive, most biodiverse wetland areas in the United States. Perhaps 40% of the nation’s wetlands lie along that coastline, home to god knows how many species of birds, etc. Ecologically speaking it’s the soft underbelly of the nation – the fact that makes drilling in the gulf such a reckless choice. What the hell is this going to mean for this amazingly rich national environmental endowment? Disaster. Fucking disaster.
The triumph of Joe Arpaio. So now if you’re driving while dark in Arizona (or wearing the wrong limos), expect to be carded in a very serious way. Like… show me your birth certificate. (Note to Obama – don’t go there. Something tells me they won’t accept yours as valid.)
like some annoying neighbor up the street who has a voice like a grammar school bugle (as well as an upcoming show on Animal Planet that