Political capital and malaise

[nadinbrzezinski]

folks... whether you are a fan of BO or not, one thing is sure... Americans are all but a patient people and this disaster in the gulf is going to last for upwards of a year (that is an absolute nightmare from a political POV, let alone the environmental POV).

So no matter what you think of BP or BO or anything like that, realize that this event can and is damaging this presidency. It don't matter what they have done... and lord knows some of us have pointed it out... the OPTICS are not there. And partly they are not there since well, the Government sucks at PR.

So believe it or not, and this is a nightmare, the RNC actually has a better chance of capturing the WH in 2012. In the end it might come to a very heroic decision and that is NOT to run for the office in 2012. I don't expect any politico to do that, but realize that the RNC is licking it's chops and the MSM is helping spread this meme that the Feds are doing nothing...

But yes, this lasting upwards of a year... it is very much possible given the history of previous incidents... and that will lead to upwards of 40 million ecological refugees... and returning these places to a "natural state" will take upwards of a generation. No, will not kill the gulf, or life on Earth, but the POLITICAL damage and the Environmental damage will be enough to hopefully wake the children up... as to WHY we need to move away from petrochemicals. But as I have explained in previous posts when this is the basis of a technological pyramid it is very easy to say, but hard to implement, and with the RNC in charge down right impossible.

[DJ13]

1. The political damage would seem to originate in our politicians

unrelenting faith in corporations.

That can cut across party lines, as both have been preaching the wonders of unrestrained capitalism for too long now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. I got a better idea

let's kick them off to the curb... I mean the corporations controlling the specialized ROVs we need to plug this and watch the gulf until the well empties. For political reasons starting with Reagan, the US Government DOES NOT have the equipment or expertise for this. So your choice is one corporation or the next... but that is your real world choice.

I wish it was different, but that is the REAL WORLD choice, let it empty, or let the evil corporation try to plug it off... oh wait, they are required to under US Law...

[Cant trust em]

2. Yes, this is going to make 2012 even more difficult.

It’s tough to make the “no, really, we’re doing everything we can” argument stick come election time.

No one really knows what the administration could be doing much better, but you can bet that the republicans are going to use it against us and it’s going to work.

[Captain Hilts]

4. We need to go on offense, for example, by showing where oil contributes in DC.

For starters.

Then, we need to explain the oversight laws and regulations that were weakened by President Bush and the Republican congress in 2003.

Let's do it!

[Cant trust em]

5. Something tells me that opening up the records on oil donations will hurt us

Maybe not quite as much as republicans, but it will probably put us in the same boat with them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Can you say Blanche Lincoln?

I knew you could. It still is far more to RNC members... but the POLITICAL class gets money and recent USSC decisions will make this that much worst for all.

(Citizens United in case anybody is wondering)

[Captain Hilts]

10. 75% to 25%, I believe. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. I don't have stats to go from

but reality is that we will see interesting problems... and they will only increase

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. As well as show exactly what the Feds are doing right now

COUNTER the meme of government is doing nothing. But also explain WHY BP "is in charge," and has to do with the 1990 law, which was written by you know who... industry insiders.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Exactly. Some of the messaging is very simple. Get the DNC off its ass. nt

[ThomWV]

7. What event in history suggests we could see upwards of 40 million "ecological refugees"

Sounds questionable to me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. You'll see

we don't have radiation, but this has a lot in common with Chernobyl actually because of WHAT is being damaged. Not like you can just wash it off.

You'll see, the worst of this is not even hitting consciousness yet. Suffice it to say coastal towns in marshy areas in the past have become ghost towns for a while, with recoveries too, taking at a bare minimum ten years.

But you think people who will not be able to find jobs will stay there? Well dear, that is a definition of a refugee. And I know it is not a chic term to use in the US... even when it fits the actual definition.

[Captain Hilts]

13. It might also create economic refugees. Coastal resort folks, fishing industry, etc. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. If we did not have the actual oily sheen

We would not have them. Why they are being pushed out by ecological damage. Or rather will be pushed away. There is a limit on how long people will hang out waiting for things to recover. But yes, they also fit the definition of an ecologic refugee, but due to ecologic reasons.

[Captain Hilts]

15. Jindal is doing all he can to help us here with his comments on more drilling. Run with it! nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. And how much he wants guv'ment to act

but not too much Guv'ment... exactly who I am thinking as a possible hero run for the RNC... like oh... Giulani, word, verb and 9.11 Giulani

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.