Another offshore oil rig explosion — nothing to worry about folks…

Today’s offshore drilling rig explosion is coming off like the last one:

Initial reports were nothing to worry about folks, everyone is okay (except one guy who had to be flown to the hospital) and there is no sign of escaping oil. Radio reports on the station I was listening to, KNX, LA, implied or at least speculated that the the well was not even in production.

Now I just read on Yahoo News and the Huffington Post that there is an oil sheen appearing and in fact the rig was in production. I believe they say it is in shallower water than the BP Deepwater Horizon, which was (is) the worst oil spill in history.

You recall that in that fiasco we were assured that everything was under control (for a few days as I recall), but it was not.

———————–

ADD 1:

At 4 P.M. PDT there seem to be conflicting reports as to whether oil is leaking or there is a sheen on the surface of the water. The fact that there was an explosion is not in dispute, apparently.

—————————-

And to think, one candidate for California’s open U.S. Senate seat, the Republican challenger (whose name I don’t want to look up for spelling at the moment) is all for offshore drilling. The  rig explosions of course were in the Gulf of Mexico, but I for one do not want anything similar to happen off of the California coast or anywhere for that matter.

I am against offshore drilling, but I realize it is probably a fact of life. But certainly it requires much stricter oversight and regulation.

P.s.

I guess the environmentally indifferent will just yawn and think, oh well the naturally occurring oil-eating microorganisms will take care of things.

If the oil is gone, that’s good, but I hope that does not send the wrong message…

While the seemingly apparent good news on the Gulf of Mexico BP oil spill is that the hole has been plugged — even though further hole plugging work and/or relief well work continues — most of the oil seems to have disappeared.

But the bad news on this to me is that it gives an excuse to all those anti-environmental naysayer’s, who seem to think we all worry too much about being kind to the planet and want to send everyone back to the stone age, to proclaim that environmental concerns are always bunkum.

First I find it hard to believe that there will be no major and bad residual effects, and second, I really would like to know where the oil really did go.

Of course I know that nature is miraculous. Scientists found that out after the natural devastation of Mr. St. Helens years ago. I think within the first year the area that faced the worst devastation started little by little coming back to life. The ash dumped over the northern Great Plains turned out to be a helpful soil amendment.

As bad as the Exxon Valdez spill was and despite the fact that many fishermen and others never recovered. In general, the area survived and life goes on.

And despite the fact that American scientists opened Pandora’s box by creating the A bomb during World War II, we have not faced the nuclear holocaust yet — yet (well except for a few hundred thousand in two Japansese cities).

I still think we should do more to protect Mother Earth and I am not much of a risk taker myself and why do we constantly want to risk ruining our planet anyway?

A false story on China drilling in Gulf of Mexico becomes true — even if false

Back in 2006 and since then, former Vice President Dick Cheney asserted that Red China (to use the old term) was drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, and what with drilling restrictions, we, the U.S., were in danger of losing out on the hunt for this precious resource in our own backyard.

Lately, some Republicans, and I suppose others in the drill baby drill crowd, have been repeating this line.

Several months ago I picked up on the rumor and mentioned it in my blog, although I looked back and saw that I had said it was apparently a false rumor by Cheney. Nonetheless I asserted that if it was true we might have a case for asserting our Monroe Doctrine which calls for keeping foreign powers out of our hemisphere.

So, when I read yesterday an item from the McClatchy news service that the rumor of Chinese offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, just off the coast of Florida, was false, I initially thought: didn’t I write about that as being true or at least thought to be true?

So, temporarily I fell for the rumor I had already asserted was false.

We all can’t remember the source of everything we hear and read about or recall the credibility of it all. And that is what those who like to play fast and loose with the truth depend upon.

Now to be clear, I still am not sure about the status of Chinese oil exploration and actual drilling here or anywhere else. I have read several times and commented on Chinese oil activities in Iraq where the Chinese have taken no risk and where the U.S. has spent so much blood and treasure.

(And now that we have been told that Afghanistan might be sitting on a wealth of valuable minerals — maybe not oil — I have read the Chinese are attempting to make deals on that.)

I have always been dubious about the advisability in terms of environmental risks posed by offshore drilling. And when I travel past those rigs near Santa Barbara, Ca. and that beautiful coastline, I dread — what if?

There is hope expressed today from BP that even though it has just let that disastrous oil flow in the Gulf of Mexico go full blast temporarily, it might actually get it plugged up by Monday if its latest gambit to recap it works — let’s hope so.

A lot of environmental damage has been done already. Nature does have a way of restoring itself, but how long will it take? And will it be in our lifetimes or your lifetimes or your children’s or grandchildren’s?

Congressional hearing on BP embarrassing waste of time…

Congressional hearings can be a waste of time, and in fact the one I caught some of today, which will be yesterday by the time most anyone would read this, was embarrassing, if not shameful.

I’m nearly as mad at BP and its CEO Tony Hayward as anyone could be, save those directly affected by his company’s ham handedness or greed and carelessness.

But I think I have to agree with some citizen commentors from the affected areas. What we need to be doing now is get the oil leak stopped — we can sort out the blame and punishment later.

I watched the very opening on the computer and listened to some of it while I was working (driving an 18-wheeler down the road and dropping off and picking up freight). All it was was congressmen asking self-serving loaded questions and they demanded that Hayward answer in a certain way, but like Obama, he kept his cool — he ain’t no fool.

It was like a kangaroo court.

I think we pretty much all realize by now that BP cut corners on safety in the name of profits and they were working in unknown territory, a mile under the sea. While the top guys of other oil companies claimed in earlier testimony they wouldn’t have done things the way BP did, that is easy and convenient for them to say — maybe so, maybe not, they didn’t get caught.

I’m not at all sure that the oil leak can be stopped by man.

I was going to post a blog the other night right after the president’s speech, but due to a computer glitch or my own mistake, added to the fact I had just driven 11 hours, I had to give it up.

But all I was going to say is that I thought something was missing from Obama’s speech, but I could not quite put my finger on it. I had blogged earlier that I thought he should directly address the American people. And at least he did that. And he did promise to put all efforts into fixing the leak and not let up until it is done.

I also now don’t think that speech was the time to politic on alternative energy, even though most political experts would say a crisis should not go wasted. Since alternative energy seems to be such a hot button and divisive issue (what isn’t these days?), I thought it kind of got in the way of the message that he was on the immediate problem at hand.

And beyond all this, I find it puzzling indeed that so many who scoff at environmental concerns and say they are nothing more to barriers to business, now seem to want to blame everything on Obama. It was the policies of primarily Republican administrations (but I suppose Democrats too) that led to such lax safety precautions.

But it is true that for a variety of reasons that this nation must move full speed ahead on the issue of developing alternative energy. I think now that it will take a government program similar to the moon landing project. Private industry can kick in later, but it is not good at long-term research and development. Shareholders are impatient and profit driven (and I suppose somewhat understandably so).

That comment I made about not being sure man can stop the oil leak came as the result of me reading a blog supposedly quoting various engineers — but of course you have to take a lot of what you read, especially on the internet, with a grain of salt, to include this blog, maybe. I try to stick to facts or at least legitimate conjecture, along with a little sarcasm and satire.

Frankly I don’t care if Gulf residents don’t want drilling stopped or not…

There seems to be a conflict between people on the Gulf Coast and even in the life of individuals themselves when it comes to this BP oil blowout.

While the oil polluting the waters is devastating the fishing and tourist industry, the moratorium on underwater drilling (a direct result of the unfolding environmental disaster) is throwing large numbers of people out of work, since the oil economy is so big down there. In fact, it is reportedly much bigger than the fishing industry.

So while everyone is ragging on President Obama to stop the oil — everyone from die-hard environmental-denying right wing Republicans to fishermen to even oil drilling workers to the average American, he is taking heat for doing the prudent thing, shutting down drilling until we can be sure it’s safe — the oil’s killing us, but don’t stop it.

I can see the quandary or dilemma here. On the one hand, we have to stop the oil from polluting our ocean and since we thought things were safe before, but they were not, it only seems reasonable to stop things for now until we can get a handle on it all. But meanwhile in the middle of the Great Recession we are throwing thousands out of work.

And then today on the radio (and most of the talk on radio is reactionary right wing) they are saying that a majority of folks in Louisiana do not approve of the way Obama is handling things and that they don’t like the moratorium on underwater drilling — even as the sea turns red and marine life dies off as in some biblical plague — and right there, isn’t that ironic, since the right wing loves so much to spout off or refer to biblical prophecy — maybe this is part of what is foretold in the Book of Revelation.

Maybe you bible-quoting right wingers who seem to worship the god of oil money and comfort more than God Almighty himself, are reaping what ye have sewn — may ye drown in a barrel of oil.

But seriously, I don’t care what the people of Louisiana think, necessarily. It’s not their Gulf or their ocean; it is all of ours’.

I need to read more about this all, but one headline I read hit what has occurred to me — what if the leak or gusher or whatever you call it cannot be stopped?

Will the people who call you a tree hugger or crazy hippie environmentalist still deny it all? No, they’ll blame it on Obama or Bill Clinton or maybe they’ll go way back in time and blame it on Jane Fonda.

I say it’s Sarah Palin’s fault!

P.s.

In the interest of balance, I note that Mr. Obama did some God talk himself in his Oval Office address. Of course he is not politically right wing — but even though we all have a right to refer to God, don’t tell that to the Christian right — they think they have exlusive rights on the subject.

As the oil spreads, how long before mockers quit mocking?

The oil keeps spreading like a virus.

It’s as if we are being attacked and can’t do anything about it.

We’d like to sick the Coast Guard on it. But what are they supposed to do? Shoot it?

I’d like to see the president, the commander and chief, take charge. He’s supposed to save us. I think it’s in the job description.

He says he is in charge. Has been since Day One. In fact I read in the last day or so that actually President Obama was briefed early on that the problem was not going to be easily nor quickly fixed.

Obama has played it mostly cool, although I just read on a blog on the Daily Beast site that he succumbed to the demand to get mad, so he dutifully said on one of the morning shows that he was ready to “kick ass”.

But at any rate, from all the news I hear, it seems BP still has a lock on a lot of the info and is in fact using its money to even try to control internet access to the news or at least pollute and dilute the media with its propaganda.

Although I’ve heard the reports that the oil has spread beyond Louisiana and is making its way onto Florida beaches and I’ve seen all the photos of oil-soaked birds and turtles and dead fish and distressed fishermen and so on, I still don’t seem to have a handle on how bad the kill off of wildlife is. Just heard a report on a Public Radio show that so far it is not as bad as was the case in the Exxon Valdez incident, but the potential is a lot worse. The Valdez was a tanker with a known amount of oil. This underwater gusher is virtually limitless.

And before I forget, something occurred to me. This incident was man caused. But could such a thing happen naturally? I mean couldn’t there be some type of underwater earthquake or something that could cause oil to gush out?

And then there’s the politics of it all. Now the right wingers usually mock any concern over the environment. But now some have taken to criticizing their arch-enemy, Obama, for not acting quickly enough to save us all. Well if environmental concerns are so silly, what’s the problem?

Also there is the paradox of people wanting the oil leak stopped and criticizing Obama for not stopping it but at the same time complaining about him putting a moratorium on new underwater drilling — we need the jobs.

I would think we as the American people have every right to be angry at BP for not taking necessary safety precautions and Obama has expressed that anger himself. But one right-wing business above all radio pundit was distressed because Obama had talked mean to or about BP. That would be Tom Sullivan. He also agreed with a caller that Obama in trying to put too much blame and liability and hurt on BP was risking sending that company into bankruptcy and then who would pay for the whole thing?

I don‘t think the rhetoric will throw BP into bankruptcy, but the cost of this whole catastrophe might well do it.

And someone I was listening to pointed out that BP tried to save costs and thus improve its bottom line by skipping safety precautions and in the end its safety failures may well lead to its bankruptcy.

Under no circumstances will BP actually pay all of the true costs. The biggest costs will be paid by those directly affected, those whose lives and livelihoods are ruined, such as the fishermen.

It costs the government because of all the attention it must put on the problem and of course it will cost the whole economy one way or another.

The eerie thing about all of this is that we really do not know when and if that oil will stop flowing.

It spreads like a cancer on a world that neglected to take care of itself and mocked those who have been concerned for all these years.

If the oil leak is plugged soon things might go back to normal fairly soon, except for those whose lives and livelihoods have been wrecked and the dead animals.

But if it is not and the oil keeps spreading, how long will it take for the mockers to quit mocking and start yelling in distress for someone to save them?

Mixed messages in the continuing Gulf of Mexico oil disaster; Obama should address American people directily (past news conferences) …

UPDATE: So what now? plan C or D? (I can’t keep track) The top kill and junk shot techniques have not worked, so now BP will try once more to cap the underwater well that is spewing millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, but that could take up to a week, it was reported Saturday evening. And still no solid feeling that the United States government is really on top of something that should be considered national emergency number one at the current time.

———————

Short of war, the BP Gulf oil disaster may become the longest running news story on record. Just checked the web and the news was that once again efforts to plug the underwater gusher have been halted. It seems that throwing mud and cement and golf balls and everything but the kitchen sink into the hole is not yet doing the trick.

Meanwhile, millions of gallons of oil are polluting thousands of square miles of the Gulf of Mexico and the threat is that it will spread as the result of the BP underwater oil well blowout. And scientists are saying that underwater plumes of oil are posing an invisible or hidden threat as well.

But the messages in all this are mixed (beyond oil and water). Even though residents of the areas affected so far in Louisiana desperately call for help and blame President Obama for not acting quickly and forcefully enough, there are also concerns expressed that a shut down of offshore oil drilling would endanger the area’s economy, just like the oil spill at sea endangers it too.

And while Republicans (well not all) claimed George W. Bush did what was called for during the Katrina incident, and Democrats (and others) claim he did not, now Republicans are criticizing Obama for not doing enough (and so do many Democrats), while Obama claims he has been in charge of the emergency response from day one.

While conservatives rail against big government, some of them now take the opportunity to criticize Obama (whom they see as liberal) for not using all the power of big government to deal with the emergency, and while they are usually against big government interfering with business, many think he ought to take over the emergency effort from BP, which is seen as not acting quickly or effectively enough.

I also read a column by one of those writers who makes it his profession to oppose nearly all things Obama criticizing his moratorium on new offshore drilling. He said that restrictions on offshore drilling closer to the coastlines, but somewhat safer because they are in shallower water, and on-land drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge is what has prompted drilling further out to sea and a mile deep into the ocean where things are harder to control, as BP was doing, and where, indeed, they can’t yet control things.

And while we hear the cries of devastation to beaches (resort areas) and ecologically valuable and sensitive wetlands, we also hear the complaints that while only three beaches on the Gulf are affected right now, all the negative news has discouraged tourists throughout the Gulf region to the detriment of the tourist trade.

And the fishing industry in the Gulf is shut down and in peril of being destroyed forever or for at least a generation.

Although Obama made his second trip to the Gulf Friday, he was immediately criticized by some for not staying longer and still not sounding all that convincing that he is on top of things and is in charge — even though he said he is in charge and is willing to take the blame — the buck stops here and all — in the response.

Meanwhile, BP had stopped the top kill efforts, for 16 hours, as I understand it, to shut down the underwater gusher and no one outside of BP, not even the government, it seemed was aware of it. It was also reported that BP put on a show of white-jump suited for-hire clean up workers on the beach when Obama was present and then sent them home once he had gone (BP subsequently vowed the cleaners would be back in the morning, it was reported).

But from what I am hearing and reading, I get the impression BP is still leading the government around by the nose.

As I blog this, this thing has been going on for more than five weeks and although the top kill and junk shot techniques BP is said to be using now — pouring mud and cement and golf balls and old tires and stuff down the hole — may be working (well I just learned they are not at this time), they may also not be and it might all go on until August when it is said the relief wells could be finished — or it might go on for decades (at least one scientist I heard said).

We’ve all learned a lot. We’ve learned that the governmental agencies, most notably the Minerals and Mining Management Agency (or whatever it is called) is corrupt with inspectors taking payoffs and with personnel going back and forth in employment between the industry and government. We’ve found that BP went out and drilled a mile deep without enough knowledge or even concern as to what to do should it hit a gusher and things got out of control. We’ve found out that no one was in charge and no one knew what to do on that Deep Horizon oil platform (well that’s what the headlines said) on which eleven men were killed. That’s not a criticism of the poor workers (and it’s a dangerous job and accidents will happen). It’s an indictment of BP, notorious for playing fast and loose with safety procedures and environmental concerns over the years.

But let’s get back to the big government thing. Very few people would say they are in favor of “big government”. But in a disaster, suddenly big government becomes desirable, a necessity. But how do you just create big government suddenly when you need it.

And in a world where we still value wealth and comfort and status over everything else, corruption flourishes.

I am fortunate to currently live in a place in Northern California far away from oil spills and to have one of the best views of nature anywhere in the world.

But the money-first pave-everything-over crowd is always ready to destroy it all.

And if they got their way, too many people locally would support them under the mantra: “We must have jobs”.

And one more thing, there are reports that some are getting sick in the cleanup efforts, presumably from the oil and oil mixed with toxic chemical dispersant.

I am not at all convinced that we have to spoil our nest to survive — that seems sort of a contradiction anyway.

P.s.

Just what does it take to get Barack Obama excited? And why doesn’t the leader of the world’s only superpower take it directly to BP (in person)? He should demand that the CEO meet with him (summon him, so to speak) and there should be a photo op of both of them together. And Obama should take that opportunity to say (demonstrate) that he really is in charge. I also think a television address directly to the people (aside from a news conference) on this one would be in order and quite valuable.

P.s. P.s.

I realize there is some reluctance by Obama, probably, to take complete ownership of this thing because then when things go from bad to worse he takes all the blame and it also might leave BP and out in future legal claims — but the facts are plain to see — it is all BP’s fault and liability, but the government has to be there to protect the interests, the life of the people.

OH, AND HAVE A NICE MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND!

Obama makes his case on oil disaster; I set my own record straight…

UPDATE:  It’s on again for the top kill technique of dumping mud and cement down the hole to plug the Gulf of Mexico oil leak, it is now being reported (7:21 p.m. PST). It had been halted for some time due to technical reasons. I don’t plan to keep updating this blog post by the hour, but I was surfing the web and saw the news — if you have not read this post, please do. I have some thoughts on the subject:

————————- 

Just watching — still am listening to questions and answers — President Barack Obama’s address to the nation about what he is doing about the BP Gulf oil leak disaster. He presented a pretty good case that the federal government has been in charge and he has been on it from day one and that everything is being done that can be done. And he allowed as how his administration is not perfect and some mistakes were made.

———————–

ADD 1:  I think commentator David Gergen described Obama’s address as a little flat and low keyed. And I have to say it seems that Obama as president tends to be deliberate in his actions and plays the role to some extent as a consensus builder — I’m not sure this works so well in a big time emergency. I’d rather have someone with the attitude (if not the way of thinking) of the late “I’m in charge” Gen. Alexander Haig. Obama the candidate was a little more forceful and single minded.

Obama’s cautiousness and pragmatism may be good for long-range policy making but no so good for immediate action. And despite his claims to the contrary today, it does not seem that the government took full charge from the beginning. But in the end, actions will speak louder than words.

———————————————-

It’s pretty apparent from just following the news day to day — and what are we? a month and a week or more past the beginning of the disaster? that everyone was caught off guard.

—————————-

CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION:  And for anyone who reads this blog regularly, I want to note that I had in a previous blog questioned the legal jurisdiction in the incident and even suggested it was in international waters. More careful checking — which was only a click to Wikipedia away — tells me that it was some 40 miles off shore and in U.S. territorial waters, and clearly the news has indicated from the start that the U.S. assumes jurisdiction. Thank you.

———————-

Obama admitted that there were deep flaws in government environmental and safety oversight, and of course that has been the case long before he took office.

He also said that although he is placing a moratorium on new offshore drilling he still believes the nation has to continue offshore drilling to meet its energy needs, but the disaster points to the fact it needs to work harder on developing alternative energy.

My personal feeling is that offshore drilling should be halted — it’s not worth the environmental risk. But polling shows that feeling is not shared by a majority of the electorate — and maybe they are more practical-minded that I.

It is strange that some on the right who complain about an overbearing government are now calling for bigger and bolder action by the government. It shows how disingenuous they are and what lengths they will go to oppose the middle and the left and Obama.

I’ll blog more on this and other things later today — I hope.

Has Obama met his Katrina? And real political change has to come from outside the establishment…

Is Barack Obama offering real change? To some extent, maybe. But his change, especially his inability to handle the Gulf oil spill crisis, is making his change look  too much like the same old same old Bush W methodology — he’s doing a heck of a job.

The measure of a leader is what he can do in a crisis. And in this Gulf oil disaster Obama is not particularly having his finest hour. In some ways it seems like this is his Katrina. I’d have to go back and look at the actual time line, but as I recall, we first heard that there had been an explosion on an offshore oil rig in the Gulf. There were casualties, eleven dead, but the first reports quoting experts assured us all that there was no sign of oil escaping. But maybe there should have been contingency plans in the advent that it was (and it was). Apparently there were not. That of course is primarily the fault of BP, but the federal government certainly should have had plans and realized the potential and immediately took charge and made sure something was done post haste. The response was rather slow (despite Obama administration claims) and the government let BP control the information and action, puting itself and all of us at the giant oil corporation’s mercy.

Of course Obama can’t immediately fix everything wrong in government left over from previous administrations. One big problem is that the agency or agencies that oversee oil and mining and such on land and sea are rife with corruption. We now find out that many of the inspections done on offshore oil rigs were phony — the industry did them itself and the paid-off bureaucrats signed off on them. It’s even been reported that BP took a shortcut in drilling the mile-deep Deep Horizon well by throwing sea water into it instead of mud as it was supposed to (profits before safety) . And this is what we get. But maybe if Obama was not so busy apologizing to our enemies or at least people who don’t like us and trying to rebuild a nation (Afghanistan) that resists rebuilding, he would have more time to take care of things at home.

During the Katrina fiasco, Bush just did not seem to care. It was not worth his time to help a bunch of poor people down in New Orleans who probably did not and would not vote for him and his party. In Obama’s case, I am sure he cares, but there seems to be something missing. The fact is that no one really knows what to do to stop that leak (they were still dithering this morning, more than a month after the thing began), and that is not the president’s fault.

————————————– 

UPDATE: a so-called top kill procedure began at 1 p.m. central time today (5-26-10) in which BP is essentially throwing mud and concrete down the hole in an attempt to plug it up but its CEO was only giving the gambit a 60 percent or so chance to work. Meanwhile I just heard  a report that the oil gushing out (millions of gallons so far) is becoming darker and presumably more toxic. It is said they might not know for days if this is working, and if not, efforts to dig relief wells would not be done until August. There is also talk of using a convoy of tankers to suck up the oil — seems like that would be hard to keep up.

——————–

But Obama needs to be more visible in marshaling the forces that can put their heads together and figure out what to do. He does not need to be anti-business or anti oil but he needs to be pro-American.

This Gulf oil disaster, with the fishery of the Gulf in peril (maybe already ruined), and the coastline and wetlands of Louisiana being devastated and the potential for far wider environmental and economic damage, needs to take priority over things such as Afghanistan where we are currently wasting blood and treasure.

And again, Obama’s change seems like more of the same. While he came in sweet-talking the Islamic world of the Middle East, he’s got the nation mired deeper than ever in the war over there.

He did not do away with torture and he continued the bank bailouts and while health care is listed as his greatest success so far, it really remains to be seen. And the housing crisis continues along with high unemployment.

Real political change may have to come from something other than the establishment.

While I hate to break down all politics to left and right, or liberal (progressive has become the modern euphemism) and conservative, I have to think that while in 2008 we essentially got change (supposedly) from the left in the presidential election, next time around it may come from the right or even more likely from something that is neither.

(And by the way, even though “liberal” has been attached to the Democrats and while liberals nowadays like to call themselves “progressives“, didn’t the “progressive” term start with Republican Teddy Roosevelt? Or at least in that era? Back then the Republicans wanted clean government and instituted civil service to replace the spoils system, while Democrats seemed to prefer machine politics that got votes by handing out jobs).

If the economy does not improve substantially, in the presidential election of 2012 or even the congressional elections next fall we might get real change (though not necessarily change for the better).

There are a lot of other issues other than the economy — defense, war policy, illegal immigration, gay rights (I prefer really to say homosexual rights, but the word gay has been ruined for decades now — it used to just mean happy), the environment (BP spill, a good example), and so on, but the economy or the perception of the economy usually takes center stage in elections.

I thought it was strange Al Gore not only lost due to an electoral college technicality but did not win by a landslide, seeing as how he would have presumably continued the relative prosperity under Bill Clinton — but I guess people did not know the bottom was going to fall out and so they thought they could afford to express their disgust with Clinton’s outrageous lack of judgment and morals (and I can understand their disgust).

But unless my memory fails me, the economy helped George W. Bush, one of our most obviously dull witted presidents, win two terms, even while it had ruined his dad’s (a far brighter bulb) chance for a second term.

I still think the vast majority of the electorate remains essentially middle of the road — it just tends to swing a little left and a little right at times.

But things are so bad (even though there are some signs of economic improvement here and there) and the corruption and ineffectiveness of government so great, that the electorate is liable to swing back to the right or something that is not the traditional right, but is not left.

The tea party movement and its faction of libertarians and the stray bigots and nut cases add another element that does not exactly fit into the familiar liberal/conservative paradigms.

While I doubt the new element can gain much strength in government by itself, I do believe it can have, or has had successes with individual candidates and I really believe it can have a major impact on the actions of the establishment, whose professional politicians are fighting for their survival. Since the tea party still seems to be closer to the Republicans, that party, the GOP, is particularly vulnerable to its influence.

The libertarian element really offers a challenge to the establishment who can only think in left and right terms because it is left and right or right and left at the same time.

In addition, hard-core tea baggers threaten to oppose the entire establishment to include Republicans and Democrats.

Both the Republicans and Democrats, who have had a stranglehold on politics since the Civil War, are facing insurrections within their own parties as well as a challenge from what amounts to a quasi third party, the tea party. In some respects the tea party will remain stronger if it remains tea party lower case instead of becoming an official party with membership and bylaws and a written platform and its name on the ballot, as in Tea Party. It’s hard to fight a challenger you can’t quite identify.

While I think there are regressive and racial overtones and outright idiots within the ranks of the challengers, overall I still feel this new movement of change (different from the Obama change) is a healthy development for our democracy.

Presumably candidates on the national level will still have to appeal to the broader electorate, so that is a safety mechanism.

On the other hand, if the establishment keeps failing and desperation is too acute, extremists could get the upper hand.

As oil gushes underwater all the Energy Secretary knows is what he reads in the papers (he said that)

Asked why or whether new offshore drilling permits were being issued even as the Gulf oil spill (leak,underwater gusher) moves into its second month, and more importantly, even after President Obama placed a moratorium on offshore drilling, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu could only answer — “all I know is what I read in the papers”. Well that might have been amusing when Will Rogers said it. But when the Secretary of Energy says it and makes subsequent remarks that indicate he really means it, I think we might be in trouble. The bureaucracy is getting in the way of getting things done or maybe the moratorium was more an exercise in politics and its enforcement is made impossible by devious use of semantics.

I just heard the secretary on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC.

He said flat out that he was not aware if permits were still being issued, but that he personally thought they should not be. He admitted to his host that he only found out about the issue of the permits by “reading the same story you did in the New York Times”.

Now quite frankly I did not read that story when I first saw it on the web — I just read the headline. Then after reading the story after I heard them talking about it I found out that part of the problem may be different interpretations within the Interior Department as to what the moratorium includes. There was some indication that the permits were for existing, not new wells.

Also many environmental waivers on offshore drilling, to include in the Gulf, have been issued since the moratorium, according to the story. That does not seem smart to me since everyone admits, and it is obvious, that no one knows what to do in this current disaster.

While there is some pressure for the U.S. government to just take over the operation to plug the leak, the problem it has been brought out is that our own government does not know what to do and does not have the total resources anyway. It is dependent upon the cooperation and resources of BP.  As I blogged before, BP has the government over a barrel on this one — to some extent anyway.

I watch too much TV. But Chris Matthews says we are at the mercy of BP because we have allowed another corporation to get “too big to fail”.

And here’s something that’s bothered me and to which I have not found an answer. This BP rig is in international waters, as I understand it. How is the jurisdiction decided on this?  UPDATE:  (5-27-10)   And though the magic of the computer I can go back in time now and correct and/or clarify those last two sentences. Now as I understand it the leaking underwater well is 41 miles off the U.S. coast and is in U.S. territorial waters. I got a little too much in a hurry to post and a little lazy in my fact checking. 

P.s.

Energy Secretary Chu is highly intelligent, a Nobel Prize winner, and seems like a nice guy dedicated to his job — but gee, saying “all I know is what I read in the papers?” Couldn’t he have inspired a little more confidence?