One part of political debate I like is using images to make a point. Whether it is a chart or a quote image, these graphics hold on to the adage that a picture is worth a thousand words. They are also easy to share in social media. However one still needs to be careful one isn’t sharing inaccurate information. Don’t post or share any graphic unless you can confirm the accuracy of the information.
Read Full Post
Today in my twitter stream was someone ranting about Glenn Greenwald and Katrina vanden Heuvel writing nice things about Ron Paul. In fact the person said both were RWNJs for supporting Paul. Of course the tweeter was wrong. Neither was supporting Paul only pointing out the ideas that Paul has that liberals usually support. I agree with most of what Greenwald writes but when talking about Ron Paul I disagree with his unstated conclusion.
Read Full Post
I found out tonight that the so-called “professional left” has the power to keep President Obama from being re-elected and those on the left who criticize the President, like me, are the enemy. It seems that there are some on the left that wish there was a propaganda machine like we see with the GOP/Fox “news” nexus. Such a wish is wrong and won’t help in President Obama’s re-election. Criticism, when based on facts, isn’t an enemy if we want to hold our elected officials accountable. I think only being a cheerleader is not being a complete and productive citizen of this country.
Read Full Post
On Thursday US House Speaker John Boehner stood before reporters and, in an attempt to deflect growing pressure on his party’s obstruction of President Obama’s jobs plan, demanded the President help pass 15 so-called Jobs bills passed in the House and stuck in the Senate. The bills that Boehner defines as “job bills” have nothing to do with actual jobs. The bills only help the 1% by gutting EPA rules and allowing more environmentally suspect oil drilling.
Read Full Post
I am strongly opposed to the death penalty. It is a waste of time and money and isn’t justice. I strongly support the rule of law, due process, and the criminal court system. I seemed to throw all that out late Sunday evening when I learned that US Special Forces killed terrorist Osama Bin Laden.
I was concerned when the media started to ramp up coverage late Sunday evening for an unusal statement from President Obama about a publicly unknown topic. Such sudden statements either mean a military operation has occurred, there was a death of a significant figure, or a killer asteroid was about to snuff out civilization. None of those are really good news but the President surprised me. He announced that the terrorist Osama Bin Laden had been killed in a raid on a house in Pakistan by US Special Forces (reports say it was a Navy Seal team).
I fully support due process and the legal system but Bin Laden wouldn’t give up so his death is not a problem for me. He was either going to be dead in a shoot out or dead from old age in a dank dark prison and I am slightly happy about it. The man helped plan, fund, and execute terrorist activities including 9/11 that killed THOUSANDS.
But let me be clear I do NOT support an eye for an eye. I would have been just as happy if he was alive and in custody and on his way to Gitmo or wherever the government would put him.
I have never believed that the death of a criminal in response to the deaths of their victims is appropriate. I also disagree with any policy that would call for targeted killing of “bad guys”. I would like to think, short of evidence to the contrary, that President Obama authorized the capture of Bin Laden and that he forced the fire fight that in the end led to his death.
Sunday night, after the statement, the news channels showed crowds in DC and New York celebrating like their favorite team had won the World Cup. I understand the emotion but it was no better than the scenes on 9/11 of Palestinians dancing in their streets.
The death of Bin Laden wasn’t a victory or justice. It was an end to a chapter of our history. It was 10 years in the making.
I also have some friends who are a bit upset at the use of the military and the killing.
I have always been of the mind that sometimes use of the military is necessary. Using the legal system and police work should be the default but sometimes we have to deal with irrational assholes who don’t subscribe to law and order.
I thought the invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to hand over Bin Laden was the right thing to do and the use of Special Forces to raid Bin Laden’s compound on Sunday without telling Pakistan was also correct. There have been a lot of questions about the Pakistani response to Bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban. For years it supported Bin Laden and the Taliban as a policy to keep India, their on again off again enemy, off balance.
I also think the burial of Bin Laden within 24 hours of his death as prescribed by Islamic law was much more than he really deserved seeing how his buddies in Iraq and Somalia abused and mutilated dead Americans over the years.
With the final objective of the war in Afghanistan completed with Bin Laden’s death, I would hope we can bring our soldiers home sooner rather than later.
In covering the news last week that President Obama had the State of Hawaii release his “long form” birth certificate, Jon Stewart and the Daily Show took some shots at several talking heads on MSNBC saying the whole birther issue was racist. I love Jon and the show but this time his quest for equivalency led to a false conclusion.
The tag line for the video clip says it all:
Larry Wilmore claims that the birther controversy isn’t racist — it’s just an opportunity for Republicans to scare old people. (05:11)
The problem is that Stewart and Wilmore ignore the 800 lb gorilla in the room. The questions about Obama’s citizenship would have NEVER come up if he was a WHITE MAN named Steve.
If that isn’t pointing out the racism I don’t know what else would. The whole birther farce is as disgusting as the Willie Horton ad used in the 1988 elections or what Karl Rove did to John McCain in 2000 in South Carolina.
President Obama signed the law that repealed the “Don’t ask Don’t tell” policy that had prohibited gay people from serving in the military. If you read the blogs and websites that lean left you would think it was Bastille Day. Don’t get me wrong I think it’s a good thing but the exuberance of the event outstrips the over all accomplishments of the President so far. He reminds me of a moody abusive parent where one moment it is all loves and hugs and the next minute you get locked in a closet for waking him up from a nap.
Here is one example from Talking Points Memo:
President Obama this morning signed into law the bill repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
“I am just overwhelmed,” Obama said as he took the stage among chants of “Yes we can!” and whoops from the audience. “This is a very good day.”
“No longer will our country be denied the service of thousands of patriotic Americans who were forced to leave the military, regardless of their skills, no matter their bravery or their zeal, no matter their years of exemplary performance, because they happen to be gay,” he said. “No longer will tens of thousands of Americans in uniform be asked to live a lie.”
Obama was joined on stage by Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen, Sens. Joe Lieberman, Susan Collins and Harry Reid and Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Patrick Murphy, an Iraq War veteran who had pushed for DADT repeal.
Or this from Washington Post’s Greg Sargent:
The White House:
Finally, the White House. Obama had been criticized for months on don’t ask don’t tell, with advocates complaining that his administration aggressively defended DADT in court and that he wasn’t doing enough to rally the Senate to pass repeal. But the botton line is that the White House did everything possible to create the political climate necessary to make this happen. The Pentagon report and the testimony by Robert Gates — and his public round of interviews calling on Congress to pass repeal for the good of the military — were major game-changers.
Also: For all the criticism of the Obama tax deal, today’s victory stands as partial vindication of his strategy. Getting the tax deal wrapped up early made the time for repeal, with only days left in the lame-duck session.
This is an important victory for the White House in another way. It will quiet all the talk about Obama’s supposed “triangulating,” because it demonstrates — for the time being, anyway — that even as the White House sees a need to trade away some core liberal priorities to compromise with Repubilcans, Obama seems to want to bring the left along with him, to whatever degree he can. This will make it tougher to argue that Obama’s strategy is to deliberately alienate the left in order to win back the middle of the country.
This moment in the Senate will take its place in the history books alongside other ground-breaking civil rights votes, and stands as an important reminder that as broken as our system seems at times, progress towards a more just and inclusive society is still possible.
And from “Mark Warner is God” on Daily Kos:
The bottom line is that no one will remember these people in 2 years when Obama crushes….WHOEVER. Members of this very group will either (1) not even remember that they were ever angry at Obama or (2) assign themselves credit for pushing Obama to the Left and facilitating his win. And that’s fine. Because in 20 years – when people take the long view – people won’t call Barack Obama a “dangerous” president. They’ll see things like the DADT repeal (YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), healthcare reform, and other liberal reforms and rather calmly say things like, “You know, that Obama was kind of annoyingly pragmatic, but he really moved the country to the left on an insanely wide range of issues!”
PS: YEAH DADT REPEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And these are just a few examples of the mass celebration over the repeal of DADT.
But for every “bone” like repeal of DADT we then get a sick upside the head like the Bush tax cut deal.
As a friend of a friend on Facebook noted:
The problem with that is [compromise] only works if you extract something of value in return. He’s done that once or twice, most importantly with the tax cuts/unemployment benefits. But too often his foes have no interest in working with him and he winds up either with nothing (the Dream Act for instance) or has to water down and dilute his initial plans to the point where the final product is far weaker than it started out (Health care, net neturality rules).
DADT was one of those public winning laws. Civil rights laws usually are popular with the public. The Tax cut deal was also popular with the public because most people like tax cuts even if they don’t consider the long term effects.
I think I understand what the President is doing but there are many issues he has been short on that can’t be made better by the win on DADT.
I just hope I don’t wake him up from his nap too early.
In case people don’t understand why a lot of progressives like myself are upset with the proposed tax cut deal brokered by President Obama and the TP/GOP I wrote an analogy:
Look at it this way. I am the Democrats and I have a large pizza cut in 8 slices. You are the GOP and have a six pack of beer. I don’t need the beer because I have soda pop but you really want some pizza since there is no other food in the house. You also have a trigger to a bomb that will blow up the house next door killing the family that lives there.
A rational person in that position would offer a slice for 3 bottles of beer and the family’s freedom but since I am the Democrats I instead open the negotiation by offering 5 slices for one bottle and your promise to think about not blowing up the house next door. You accept and say we compromised and had bipartisanship and in the words of an old cellphone commercial “Daddy got hosed…”
Here’s the old cellphone commercial
The mainstream media narrative seems to be a huge GOP victory in November. I would like to see the votes counted first but it might be bad for the Democrats. Are the voting public so forgetful of the Bush years that they will vote to have his policies again? Really? You have choice – continue down the correct road or go back to the nasty time of the Bush years.
Here is one example of the narrative:
Republican John Kasich has zoomed to a whopping 17-point lead in a new Quinnipiac Poll released today, an indication that predictions of a GOP landslide across the nation will come true.
The former congressman is up 54 percent to 37 percent over Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland, the largest lead of any poll to date on this year’s governor’s race. The Dispatch Poll published Sept. 5 showed Kasich ahead by 12 points.
Then there is this:
Greg notes two polls — the just-released NYT/CBS poll and last week’s National Journal poll — both of which show that voters believe the GOP would govern like Bush. According to the NYT/CBS poll, 47% believe Republicans would return to Bush policies compared to just 36% who believe they won’t. And according to the National Journal poll 45% believe that the GOP’s agenda is the same as Bush’s compared to 33% who don’t.
Really? Preventing a depression, getting basic health insurance to the 40 million who didn’t have it, restoring our reputation within the world, winding down the worse military mistake since Vietnam in Iraq and moving to end the 2nd worse in Afghanistan, and reforming a banking industry that almost ran us off a cliff, AND a large number of people want to go back to the Bush years? Really?
If you do then you are a fucking moron. Anyone who would lose their mind over basic health insurance for those without need to have their head examined and their brains replaced.
Those on the left who might let that happen by sitting at home by not voting – you are fucking morons.
Yes, I have had my issues with President Obama and the Democrats. Not because I hated their policies but because they didn’t go far enough. I wanted universal health care, breaking up the big bangs and jail for the creeps who fucked us over, jail for anyone in the Bush administration that tortured or allowed torture to happen for example. I didn’t get what I wanted but I am damn sure I don’t want the Republicans and their Tea Party branch to be in charge.
You all have a choice. Stand up for this country and what is right – stand up for our values or be a fucking moron getting fucked over by big business at every turn.
At the end of July, I wrote a post about President Obama’s video address to Netroots Nation – a group of liberal bloggers and Internet users. I complained that Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress were not using their Congressional majority to pass laws that would actually help regular Americans. They had compromised too much with the GOP. It seems more people in the Netroots are coming around to my feelings.
I wrote:
The pundits have been complaining the President hasn’t been out banging the pots and pans about his agenda being passed and I think I know why. I think they know the bills – like Health Care reform (HCR) and financial reform – don’t mean anything to regular people outside of DC. HCR won’t really take effect until 2013 (one of the compromises that watered the bill down) and the financial reform didn’t punish the bankers that screwed our economy. You would think that any “victory” would have a ticker tape parade with a band and party favors but nope.
It’s as if the administration wasn’t surprised at getting limpy bills passed.
That’s what’s so sad. The Democrats pissed away their power these past two years. They had such great potential.
I am also mad because I have no alternative. I will have to hold my nose and keep these losers in office because the alternative – the GOP – is much worse. And the White House knows it.
Netroots, President Obama, and the Democrats – a sad rocky relationship
Ian Welsh, on Crooks and Liars, wrote an excellent essay that describes my problem with the President better than I did in my July post:
If Obama had wanted a $1.2 trillion stimulus, say, he should have asked for a $1.6 trillion stimulus. Then “moderate” Republicans and Dems could have negotiated him down $400K. This is basic negotiation, which anyone who has ever negotiated in a third world bazaar knows—you start off with an offer far higher (or lower) than what you’re willing to accept, and leave room for the inevitable haggling.
The same is true of health care reform. If you’re negotiating for a public option—if you actually want one, then you don’t throw single payer advocates out. You act as if that’s something you’re seriously considering, you talk about polls showing it has majority support, and you then “compromise” to a public option.
This sort of self-defeating, pre-negotation concession has been a repeated pattern for the Obama administration (assuming that Obama does seek Liberal ends).
Obama has a huge slush fund with hundreds of billions of dollars and all the executive authority he needs to turn things around.
If Obama is not using that money and authority, the bottom line is it’s because he doesn’t want to.
Putting aside the question of what Obama could have accomplished already, if he wants to help everyday Americans, turn around Democratic approval ratings in time for the midterm elections, and leave behind him a legacy of achievement, he can still do it. If he wants to.
It also seems Markos Moulitsas, founder of Daily Kos and one of the founders of the Netroots agrees:
This goes beyond “doing something”, and into the realm of actually doing something to excite the base. The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. Half measures and compromises with Republicans who voted against final legislation certainly doesn’t count. Failing to follow through on promises on everything from comprehensive immigration reform to DADT doesn’t help. Fighting to open up more shoreline to drilling doesn’t help. Lilly Ledbetter was a step forward, then the Stupak Amendment was two steps back.
In fact, from the beginning, this administration and Democratic congress seemed more concerned with “bipartisanship” for the sake of bipartisanship, than they were in passing the best possible legislation possible. Harry Reid came off the gate in 2008 by immediately whining about “60 votes” — something I don’t recall ever hearing from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. The Obama Administration indulged Max Baucus’ “negotiations” with Republicans Mike Enzi and company, even as those Republicans publicly bragged that their entire strategy was to delay and obstruct.
People may whine about cable hosts and bloggers who point out these failings, and try to shoot the messenger. But we don’t have a noise machine like Fox’s. Rush Limbaugh reaches a third of the conservative base on a weekly base. There is nothing even remotely close to that on the Left. Limbaugh’s weekly audience is 20 million. Keith Olbermann’s is maybe a tenth of that.
No, this mess is the administration’s making, with a healthy assist from Harry Reid’s Senate. The shame is that Nancy Pelosi’s House, which did its job, will bear the brunt of the voter backlash. But the White House won’t be spared.
I admit I live in a sort of bubble since I read and participate in the Netroots. Someone who isn’t as super-informed like me might have a different view but my fear is since the mainstream media has failed in their job to report the facts, then it might be very bad for the Democrats in November.
I really don’t see a wave of incumbents being thrown out. In fact most of the incumbents who have lost lately were Republicans who didn’t fall into the Tea Party line.
I hope I am wrong and while there are some losses, the Democrats can try to pass their agenda but this time without sniffing the ass of the Republicans. The Democrats pissed away their opportunity to reform all the shit we put up with under President Bush.
The President knows what the issues are, as he said during his speech announcing the end of combat in Iraq:
Throughout our history, America has been willing to bear the burden of promoting liberty and human dignity overseas, understanding its link to our own liberty and security. But we have also understood that our nation’s strength and influence abroad must be firmly anchored in our prosperity at home. And the bedrock of that prosperity must be a growing middle class.
Unfortunately, over the last decade, we have not done what is necessary to shore up the foundation of our own prosperity. We have spent over a trillion dollars at war, often financed by borrowing from overseas. This, in turn, has short-changed investments in our own people, and contributed to record deficits. For too long, we have put off tough decisions on everything from our manufacturing base to our energy policy to education reform. As a result, too many middle class families find themselves working harder for less, while our nation’s long-term competitiveness is put at risk.
And so at this moment, as we wind down the war in Iraq, we must tackle those challenges at home with as much energy, and grit, and sense of common purpose as our men and women in uniform who have served abroad. They have met every test that they faced. Now, it is our turn. Now, it is our responsibility to honor them by coming together, all of us, and working to secure the dream that so many generations have fought for –the dream that a better life awaits anyone who is willing to work for it and reach for it.
Our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work. To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy. We must jumpstart industries that create jobs, and end our dependence on foreign oil. We must unleash the innovation that allows new products to roll off our assembly lines, and nurture the ideas that spring from our entrepreneurs. This will be difficult. But in the days to come, it must be our central mission as a people, and my central responsibility as President.
Speeches are nice but people want to see results – real results. They need jobs, they want the people who screwed the economy to go to jail, they want at least a public option in health care, and they want help to keep their homes.
If the Democrats don’t deliver then they better be ready for if not giving up Congress more obstruction from the GOP and that might hurt them going into the 2012 Presidential elections.
I wonder if the administration is even listening to what is happening outside of DC.
This weekend had the annual Netroots Nation meeting in Las Vegas. I wasn’t able to attend in person but some of the programs were streamed on the Internet and I did watch some of the keynote speakers. While I do agree with the direction the Netroots take, I was disappointed in the speech by President Obama and appearance by Senator Harry Reid.
President Obama gave a surprise speech by video to the gathering. He again pointed out the legislative accomplishments and then acknowledge the rocky relationship the left has with him. He told the gathered people to hold him accountable.
The President, suffering among this crowd for not being as progressive as they’d hoped, said that he wants the Netroots to “keep making your voices heard, to keep holding me accountable, to keep up the fight.”
Obama said “change is hard … change is possible,” and ended with, “let’s finish what we’ve started.”
Obama In Surprise Message To Netroots: ‘Consider What We’ve Accomplished’ (VIDEO)
That bothered me because we have been trying to hold him accountable and he has blown us off or worse got his attack dogs like Rahm Emanuel to tell us pretty much to f*ck off.
So which is it. Does he want us to hold him accountable or to f*ck off.
I feel like I’m in a scene from a bad buddy cop movie and the President is playing “Good Cop” and his staff is playing “Bad Cop”. UGH!
The pundits have been complaining the President hasn’t been out banging the pots and pans about his agenda being passed and I think I know why. I think they know the bills – like Health Care reform (HCR) and financial reform – don’t mean anything to regular people outside of DC. HCR won’t really take effect until 2013 (one of the compromises that watered the bill down) and the financial reform didn’t punish the bankers that screwed our economy. You would think that any “victory” would have a ticker tape parade with a band and party favors but nope.
It’s as if the administration wasn’t surprised at getting limpy bills passed.
Then we come to Senator Harry Reid. I really wish he had been challenged and lost his primary because as Senate Leader he has been as effective as a wet sponge. He leads by using the 60 vote threshold even though the Democrats don’t have 60 votes. This makes him kiss the asses of the Blue Dogs (conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson) and allowing the Republicans to pocket filibuster bills and appointments they don’t like.
It seemed that the Netroots crowd treated him like a rock star.
The most cringe worthy moment came when Donald Choi gave Reid his West Point ring as a reminder of the bad “Don’t ask don’t tell” policy. Reid promised to keep the ring until the policy is removed. Someone should tell Choi not to expect his ring back because you won’t get 60 votes in the Senate to pass any bill removing DADT in 2010 or ever in the near future.
The repeal passed the House and is now pending in the Senate. Lawmakers hope to attach it to the Defense Authorization measure likely to be debated this fall, but in an election year where control of Congress is at stake, it’s unclear if the measure will make it.
Discharged Dan Choi To Harry Reid: ‘It’s Not About Me Anymore’ (VIDEO)
That’s what’s so sad. The Democrats pissed away their power these past two years. They had such great potential.
I am also mad because I have no alternative. I will have to hold my nose and keep these losers in office because the alternative – the GOP – is much worse. And the White House knows it.
All I can do is only support real Democrats who want to fight for what is right and don’t give a crap about the Republicans or Corporate America.
*Sigh*
Caught a couple of good articles on the Internets today. One talked about why the Democrats might lose the 2010 midterm elections and another talked about how to fix the short term deficit problem. The fix doesn’t include cutting social security or electing Republicans – as smart people know.
Democrats won their massive majority because of an economic collapse. They’ve passed so much legislation because they have a massive majority based on an economic collapse. But the economic collapse isn’t over. And having a lot more seats than the other party means 1) voters blame you for the condition of the country, and 2) you have a lot of seats to lose. What the bad economy and the huge majority giveth, the bad economy and the huge majority taketh away. Om.
The incredible obviousness of the Democrats’ political fortunes
*Side Note* One reason it seems people aren’t happy with the President and the Democrats is because they still can’t rub two stones together to get us to see their half-assed watered down legislation (like the Health care reform and the recent financial reform bills for example) is the bees knees.
Policies such as the stimulus were not done well enough, and everyone from Nobel prize winners with good predictive records like Stiglitz and Krugman, down to nobodies like me, predicted it at the time. The President hired the wrong people to give him advice, didn’t even do as much as many of them wanted, and now we all pay the price.
Sometimes half doesn’t work. Half-assed rarely does. All Obama’s half assed “left wing” policies have done is discredit the left for another generation. Combined with the ability of the media, Republicans and hysterical Tea Baggers unable to use a dictionary to define him as a “socialist” this means that Obama’s policies are seen as left wing, and left wing policies are seen to have failed.
That leads us to the real fix for the deficit since the Republicans and other idiots insist on “fixing” it:
First, the facts. Nearly the entire deficit for this year and those projected into the near and medium terms are the result of three things: the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Bush tax cuts and the recession. The solution to our fiscal situation is: end the wars, allow the tax cuts to expire and restore robust growth. Our long-term structural deficits will require us to control healthcare inflation the way countries with single-payer systems do.
The deficit hawks would be satisfied and it doesn’t include Republicans or trashing the economy.
I watched President Obama’s oval office speech on Tuesday night and it felt like it was missing something. Besides lacking specifics, the President threw in a bit about praying. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a fake oval office speech on Wednesday night that was something I wish the real President had given.
Maddow said she wished Obama had announced three major developments in the response to the disaster:
1. “Never again, will any company, anyone, be allowed to drill in a location where they are incapable of dealing with the potential consequences of that drilling.”
2. “I’m announcing a new federal command specifically for containment and cleanup of oil that has already entered the Gulf of Mexico, with a priority on protecting shoreline that can still be saved; shoreline that is vulnerable to oil that has not yet been hit.”
3. “I no longer say that we must get off oil like every president before me has said too. I no longer say that we must get off oil. We will get off oil and here’s how: The United States Senate will pass an energy bill. This year.”Rachel Maddow’s Oval Office Oil Spill Speech: What She Wishes Obama Had Said (VIDEO)
Here’s the video:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thanks Rachel for a great speech.
Since the White House Press Corp insist that Obama isn’t “emotional” enough about the Oil spill here is “exclusive” audio of President Obama being angry while speaking on the phone to BP CEO Tony Hayward. We only hear Obama’s side of the conversation.
President Obama on phone to BP CEO Tony Hayward
It seems voices are getting louder that want the US government to do more to solve the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The question I ask is what can it do that isn’t being done by BP now?
Suffice to say that if BP knew what it was doing, it wouldn’t be soliciting help from the public. Suffice to say that if the Coast Guard knew what it was doing, it wouldn’t be deferring to BP. Suffice to say that local officials are literally grasping at sand. In other words, no one knows how to solve this. No one anticipated. It’s all guesswork. A month after the well blew.
I understand the anger and frustration but too many people want to blame someone rather focusing on solving the problem first. Who cares if the government hasn’t pushed BP aside and taken over – from my POV I don’t see what it can do differently to a gusher a mile under the water.
I do know that once the gusher is plugged then BP needs to be held accountable for the disaster – they need to be charged the whole cost of the clean up and lost business of those who live on the shore.