I watched Mr. Obama's speech tonight rather closely. (Well, I was actually playing guitar at the same time, but I'm a chronic multi-tasker.) It was a terrible speech. A complete failure, breaking no new ground, establishing nothing of consequence, a misuse of the Oval Office metaphor. So, I decided to imagine what I would have said if I were president. This is the result of that imagining. Remember that I'm a dyed in the wool radical, which Obama ain't.
"My fellow Americans, I am sick and tired of the bullshit that is being spoken about this catastrophe. It's time for someone to speak plainly, and honestly, to the American people. That exactly what you all hired me to do, and that's exactly what I am going to do right now.
First of all, let me disabuse you of the notion that things will ever be the same again along the Gulf Coast. Things will not be same for many years to come, and perhaps not for decades, and it is quite possible that things will never be the same again. Anyone who tells you otherwise is misleading you.
Secondly, let me disabuse you from the belief that everyone who has suffered harm from this catastrophe will be made whole. If you have been hurt, you will get help....but that doesn't mean we can restore businesses that no longer exist, or reimburse you for a lifetime of future income. That's just not possible under our system of government, unless very drastic actions are taken.
Accordingly, as your president, I am taking drastic action.
First of all, it is my opinion that British Petroleum is a criminal enterprise, and I am directing the Attorney General of the United States to institute criminal proceedings against British Petroleum under the RICO statute. And when British Petroleum is found guilty of criminally negligent homicide and criminal conspiracy, I will direct the Justice Department to seize the assets of British Petroleum and distribute them to the affected parties who have suffered from British Petroleum’s criminal negligence.
In the interim, while we are waiting for this case to work its way through the courts, I will direct the U.S. Marshals Service to seize all operating activities of British Petroleum and operate those activities in consultation with engineering firms that are expert in deep water salvage and restoration operations, taking control of this out of control well away from British Petroleum. At the same time, I will direct the Interior Department to take control of oil damage prevention and restoration efforts.
I am ordering these actions because it seems ridiculous to me to leave the relief efforts required by this catastrophe in the hands of a profit making corporation whose only objective is to make more money for its shareholders.
That being said, I now want to address the issue of whether or not to resume deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in order to preserve jobs.
My fellow Americans, are we so stupid that, having seen with our own eyes the terrible consequences of a underwater oil well blow-out, that we would allow any company to drill any more deep water oil wells in those waters that are under our legal control.
There are many thousands of jobs at stake, and no one wants to preserve those jobs more than I do, because my own job may hang in the balance….but I’m not so eager to keep my job that I am willing to risk another oil well disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
Some of my critics are concerned about the prospect that these oil prospectors might just leave our waters and go elsewhere. My response to that is: Good riddance.
To those who claim that there are safe ways to drill oil wells a mile under the ocean, my response to you is that there’s only one way to prevent another accident from ever happening: don’t drill any more deep water wells in the Gulf of Mexico.
And what about the workers who will be thrown out of work? That’s a very hard question, but there’s a very simple answer: build alternative energy systems now.
Yesterday, I asked Congress for $50 Billion for a new stimulus plan. Today, I am calling upon Congress to allocate those funds to begin a program to retrofit America’s automotive fleets to use natural gas. These funds will be used to underwrite the development of conversion facilities in the areas affected by the termination of offshore drilling operations.
The workers who have been thrown out of work by the end of deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico will be retrained to operate these facilities, and we will guarantee their salaries will match the salaries they earned on the oil rigs.
But we can’t stop there. We have to build new natural gas refueling stations all over the United States that can safely distribute natural gas. That means more work for men and women who have worked in the oil industry.
Now, finally, let me say a few words about the hyenas who keep trying to pick apart anyone who sits in this office.
It has been said that I didn’t take this problem seriously, and they are right. I was basing my actions on the information I received from British Petroleum, who had sole control over all of the information at my disposal about the scope of the oil spill.
The information we received from British Petroleum was not accurate. Whether that was an honest mistake, or a deliberate attempt to deceive this administration, remains to be seen.
Had we known on day one how much oil was being released into the ocean, we would have taken a very different course of action…but we didn’t know how bad the oil spill was and our experts – on the basis of the information received from British Petroleum – told us that the amount of oil being released was well within the ocean’s ability to break down the oil and render it harmless.
It turns out that there are millions of barrels of oil leaking into the ocean every year from fissures in the ocean floor…and the ocean breaks up those oil deposits and renders them harmless…but, here, in the Gulf of Mexico, we have a unique situation….a relatively large amount of oil being released from a single location at a relatively shallow depth compared to those natural fissures…and that makes all the difference.
Hindsight is always perfectly clear, but it is much harder to predict the future when you don’t have accurate information.
My administration based its actions on the presumption that this was a relatively minor oil spill, and the further presumption, based upon British Petroleum’s presentations, that the leak would be stopped in a a few days.
As a few days turned into several weeks, and the estimates of the amount of oil being released increased, it became obvious to us that we had been misled, and that we had to revise our responses accordingly.
Now that we know, and understand, the full extent of this catastrophe, everything changes.
In the next few days, I will be sending a bill to Congress to revise the Jones Act, which controls international shipping in American waters. In this bill, I will be asking Congress to pass a law that only American-flagged oil rigs will be allowed to operate in American waters, and that only American companies will be allowed to drill for oil in American waters.
I have suffered in relative silence while my detractors have chivied away at my efforts to make sense of this disaster.
Well, the gloves are off now. You can’t have it both ways. If you want a passive president, you elected the wrong man.
Understand that we are at a crossroads here tonight. We either move forward together into uncharted territory, taking control of our natural resources back from the companies that have abused them, or we allow them to continue to abuse us into the foreseeable future.
In a few months, we’re going to have mid-term elections in this country…and that’s where you can show your pleasure or displeasure with this new course of action but remember this:
You can’t have it both ways: You can have a weak government only if you are willing to continue suffering the ravages of corporate abuse. Or, you can have a strong government, but only if you are willing to challenge the corpocracy that has invaded every aspect of our national life.
When the pundits are done debating over this new course of action, this fact will remain: many of you have asked that I do more than I was doing, and that’s exactly what I have done. For those of you who have supported me, thank you. For those of you who have not agreed with me, I hope you will think again.


Salon.com
Comments
Lezlie
I'm no political genius but even I could see that we had to get out in front immediately on the issue. Already now half of BP's investor capital has fled out and still we wait on them instead of as you suggested and as I almost verbatim stated to him on 042910 - seize their assets and padlock them, but no we watched as the thieves made off with their plunder.
Second, and much less cool, it'd be great to see a hard line against BP this way, but with it being Britain's 2nd biggest company it'd be like declaring war on Britain, diplomatically speaking. Not sure that he should go quite that far - he's got to find the place where they are punished and accountable, but he doesn't put a whole country into bankruptcy, particularly as they are one of our staunchest allies. Just a thought...
I disagree on the Natural Gas bit, but the rest would have been great to hear.
Unfortunatly it's not going to happen, and part of that is a good thing.
It opens up the door to other courses of action, one I hope will stimulate the asses of the lazy and unconcerned.
A revolutionary movement against the corporations, and uprising if you will.
Let's just hope it doesn't take a Nada to make it happen.
Anyhoo, congrats on the EP and cover! You deserve it!
You should send him a copy of this. Maybe he can take a few pointers. R. Seriously.
Where the Democrats are absolutely losing is on a very subtle but critical point that you have cleaved correctly. By being timid, they are upsetting their base. By upsetting their base, the pollsters are either accidentally or I think often deliberately able to blur two groups: groups that think Obama has done too little and groups that think Obama has done too much. Certainly deliberately the Republicans have blurred this by simply saying people are dismayed with Obama (which is a documentable fact). They then spin that he has gone too far (which he has not, but which is hard to document because the information is lacking at the poll level and because people are mad enough for various reasons they aren't caring to correct as to why).
What this piece does is to reclaim one of the two groups that is disaffected. At the risk of the middle? Maybe. Although experience suggests that the middle is full of people who are merely attracted by strong leadership. So it couldn't hurt. I'm in the middle and I'll tell you he's losing me. I'd much rather he be decisive for exactly the strong reasons you have outlined. Those are reasons that would play right now to sensible people. And if he can't win an election playing to sensible people, the game is over anyway.
By the way, on the matter of dealing with those jobs... Those jobs are being lost because BP demonstrated they can't be trusted to be safe. As such, they are a consequence of the catastrophe. As such, those people need to be “made whole.” I say everyone who loses his job can just be subsidized by BP until they're retrained to do something else. Is that pushing the “legitimate claim” thing too hard? Let's find out.
Your suggested spin on why it took so long to engage (false information) rings true and would do better than pretending they were with it from the beginning.
The public is angry. Where I think his speech missed it was on the phrase “We will make BP pay.” The phrase should have been “We will make sure BP pays.” Such a subtle thing, but the former suggests (a) they aren't already promising and (b) there is power to make them by force of will; the latter is ambiguous as to what BP has promised and is more of an issue of being checklisty. The reason this matters is that he may not have the power, and he shouldn't have shown muscle on anything he didn't have basis for, since that's the obvious first question. Your piece here correctly notes that any claim of muscle must be accompanied by a sketch of how that muscle will be achieved.
A really fine job. Go to whitehouse.gov and make sure to submit the URL to their team. I'd also send mail to Rachel and Keith at MSNBC noting it. I didn't have time to write a piece myself today but am glad to see I got a voice anyway.
Scanner, please do not put my name into nomination. There are people out there who are still looking for me.
Matt, thanks.
Ric, wasn't in painful watching the talkmeisters trying to pretend that the speech wasn't an abject failure?
Ardee, the Fresh Air piece was inaccurate in a number of places, but the fact is that there are unscrupulous speculators using the water pressure fracturing technique, which should be outlawed. However, the vast majority of the natural gas produced in the US is produced through regular drilling of high pressure wells. Fracking is done only in situations where the natural gas is diffuse, spread through porous rock formations, which means just about everywhere in the world. The same results could be achieved using sonic canons or small explosive charges, but those have other drawbacks.
Lezle, I like Washington but not in the summer, but then I live in florida.
Greenheron: BOFA is going to crash and burn without my help.
Lunchlady: They've already read it. Big Brother is watching Open Salon. I'm sure of it.
Blue in Texas: Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the water powered car is a myth. The energy required to electrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen is exactly equal to the energy you get back when you burn the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. In other words, it's a perpetual motion machine and doesn't work. (My original background was in chemical engineering, by the way.) The use of hydrogen generators to increase fuel performance of standard gasoline engines is marginal, no more than five percent. Believe me. I researched this extensively a few years ago. By the way, the Popular Mechanics article you cited says exactly the same thing I'm saying here.
To everyone else. Stay tuned. There's more coming.
Are you so sure?
What is poetry but putting a voice to emotion?
The small people? Really?
Lezlie
and...RIGHT ON!
-rated-
THANKS, "Sage"! I would agree with all the previous post-ers who want you as the next POTUS ?"were it not"? that in my own small personal "minority of one" I ?decided? years ago that anyone who wanted the job must be at least partly mad. [Read that word whichever way you wish, o.k.?]
I'm immensely much looking forward to the continuation of this thread. Thanks to both you and Salon!!
"But" (and?) "while we're at it"......
Do you read enough UK sources to know that there are ?"folks like us"? there who "took umbrage" [sic?!] at our POTUS's insistent use of the name British Petroleum when the company and its cohorts have long preferred being called "BP"?
Isn't this a bit shifty? BP is an international company and it doesn't seem to me it's helping anything at all to act sort of "us/them" about blame/responsibilty here, ?"'eh' as the Canadians don't like us to say the Canadians like to say"?. "I mean......."
With all the interstate international acrimony (see previous Israel/Palestine discussions), could "we the people" (those of us with no stock in any of the oil companies) at least try to quiet down some of the xenophobia (if that's what it is?) of these discussions? Aren't there as many US as UK shareholders in BP?