18 June 2010

Republicans Defend BP

Is it a stunning product of the two party system, or a demonstration of the Republican's continuing love affair of big business? Incredibly, the GOP and their mouthpieces on talk radio have placed themselves in the position of defending BP.

Another exhibit of why the Republicans are hopeless.

They are defending BP. BP! The company who has done more to destroy the Gulf of Mexico, the offshore drilling industry, the most productive fishery in the nation, Gulf tourism, and any hope of establishing energy independence. And the Republicans are in their corner!

I would say it was unbelievable, except it is to be expected.

Look, I don't think much of Obama either, but damn! The spill is not his fault, and if he could stop it, I am sure he would. And as for BP -- well, to hell with them.
I am so upset about the continuing debacle in the Gulf, it has distracted me from just about any other political concerns. And no, I am not going to get more upset because Obama is putting the screws to BP to get them to cough up the dough.

But on talk radio, and the blogs, people are actually following along, and trying to --- well, defend the indefensible, it seems to me.

Just because Obama is for something, or wants to do something, it doesn't mean you have to automatically oppose it.

Big corporations can take care of themselves. But the Republican establishment is more concerned about a big oil company, than all of the livelihoods of all the workers and small businesses that have been ruined because of BP's negligence, not to mention the absolute environmental catastrophe.

If you want yet another demonstration of what is wrong with the Republican Party, here it is.

1 comment:

Lance S. Duncan said...

I guess by now you've heard about Barton's half-hearted apology for his apology to BP. As you've stated, it's not surprising that Republicans like Barton would be on BP's side. I'm also not surprised at the Republican reaction to Barton's statement and their subsequent, stern, face-saving rebuke. Emphasis on "face-saving".

I wonder how many who listen to those talk radio shows and read those blogs to which you referred will be disappointed by their rebuke of Barton.

And, in my mind, that puts the party in a rather peculiar position. How does one reconcile a party's public and frank defense of BP with the rebuke of a party member who publicly and frankly defended BP?