Kris Broughton
+ FollowBP Oil Spill Tests Obama Supporter Patience
Progressive political activists all across the web have begun to argue among themselves about the White House response to the BP oil spill. An emotional crescendo rolled through left-leaning political websites as if it were an electronic wave in the days leading up to the much awaited press conference President Obama conducted in Louisiana last Friday, leaving a frothy lather in its wake.
Many bloggers, myself included, who got tired of what we were seeing from the White House, took to our own bully pulpits – our blogs – and expressed our frustrations. Jill Tubman, the pseudonym of one of the co-founders of Jack & Jill Politics, a leading website for black progressives, found out the hard way last week how little patience some of her blog audience has for criticism of Obama.
“I’m with James Carville. The administration may be limited in what it can do, but it should be giving the impression of a) caring as much as the people of the Gulf about this and b) doing whatever they can. Why not get NASA or NOAA or Woods Hole involved? Where are the submarines, the Marines and Navy in addition to the Coast Guard?”
Barack – Bamboozled By BP and Blowing It Jill Tubman, Jack & Jill Politics
I heard about the aftermath on Twitter, where accusations of everything from personal character attacks on the president to more links than you can shake a stick at to government websites with lists detailing the response effort by the Obama Administration peppered the 348 responses to this missive over the next few days.
So I decided to see if I could catch Jill Tubman on a holiday weekend, to ask her a few questions about her experience.
Were you surprised by the reception from your own homegrown blog audience to the criticism you had for the president’s handling of the BP oil spill situation?
I was surprised by the volume of comments but not the push and pull. There are some African-Americans — especially older ones — who feel very protective of the first black presidency. For them, any criticism is highly threatening or destabilizing. They are often the most vocal & extreme. At the same time, there were enough comments supportive of either my opinion or me personally that I could see I am not alone in my belief that the President could have handled the oil spill better.
What do you think is the impetus behind some of the vitriol you received?
(see above) All black folk recognize that there is a lot of stake re: the Obama presidency — not only for him but for all African-Americans. I think for some people, critique of the President makes them feel personally vulnerable and they lash back with emotion not always grounded in the facts. I understand that. It doesn’t make me angry at them — I just disagree with their strategy of “protect the president no matter what at all costs”. I too am eager for the Obama presidency to achieve its maximum success and potential. The biggest way, I believe, that we can support the President is to give him our honest opinion — it carries a lot more weight when accountability comes from usually loyal & passionate supporters. African-Americans will de-legitimize their power if they abandon their moral compass and good sense to speak straight when things are not right.
Do you think your closing statement in this piece:
“Obama needs to get on the good foot. Before he finds a foot kicking him out the White House door in a couple of years. If there was ever an issue that threatened to damage his reputation and thwart his re-election, it’s this. If Obama doesn’t get this right, it could indeed, in the words of Glenn Beck, be Obama’s Katrina.”
Was it simply too much for diehard Obama supporters to bear?
I should have added to the last statement to be more sensitive to the survivors of Katrina and clarified in the comments of the post. I stand by those comments. It pains me to agree with Glenn Beck — to clarify, I meant this in a meta-sense. Katrina was the largest humanitarian disaster on U.S. soil. The BP oil spill is the largest environmental disaster our nation has ever seen Katrina was the point at which finally when Bush lost the confidence of the American people as a leader who could demonstrate both caring and competence in a crisis. I think that Obama was at risk of doing permanent damage to his reputation and re-election chances. He’s starting to re-position but the press conference he had last week should have happened several weeks ago.
Shutting our eyes and sticking our heads into the sand when trouble arises for the President is not the way to have his back in my opinion.
The good thing about these kinds of tempests in our electronic teapots, so long as they do not fester for long, is the depth to which each side will go to support their arguments. A vigorous debate, even if it seems to be numerically one-sided, can help to re-engage some of us who have been moseying along since the 2008 elections.
Most of us understand implicitly that no United States president is a lone gun slinger at O.K. Corral, who can be scripted to wrap things up by the credits. They are team leaders. Commanders of small armies of men and women who execute game plans on their behalf in order to advance many agendas, some large, some small, even while crises as devastating as the BP oil spill take place. We know this.
But since “Yes We Can” is the president’s theme song, it should come as no surprise that some of his supporters are itching to see a few more “Yes We Did” codas replace the historic refrain of the Obama presidential campaign.
More on Politic365
5 Responses to BP Oil Spill Tests Obama Supporter Patience
-
This has been circulating via email…perhaps you’ve seen it.
Here is an unbelievably simple solution to the Gulf Oil Spill Clean Up. No joke. It’s real and they demonstrate before your eyes…a must watch at,
http://www.wimp.com/solutionoil/ .The U.S. has all the brain power in the world to solve problems, but it only takes two good ole boys from the South to come up with a real, workable solution.
My heart goes out to all life and to those affected economically by this disaster.
-
Truthfairy says:
Why would Obama supporters reject some of the criticism of the President?
1. “Did Obama wait too long to get involved” MSM & Cable TV kept screaming.
If the media had read their materials or done any research, they could have checked the daily updates issued by the administration from Day 1 onwards, published on the main website created as an information clearinghouse…and they’d see how he was involved, as he’d said..”From Day 1″
http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/543771/2.”Why doesn’t he bring in the Army or the Marines, why doesn’t he take over the job of plugging the leak – he’s not taking this seriously enough” Chris Matthews/NBC, David Gergen/CNN, Sen Nelson, Gov Jindall & the rest
Even after he explained that the government doesn’t have the technology or resources to do so, the emergency task force has the best minds working with everyone, the critical voices stayed on it and the media repeated everyone’s criticism…”he should involve the US military.”
Today, 5/31, Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed that military officials have studies the problem and “US military does not have the technology – the oil industry are better equipped to deal with the problem.”
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/usa/Admiral-Mullen-Oil-Industry-Better-Equipped-to-Counter-Spill-95255049.html3. “President Clinton would have put a wet suit on & tried to fix it himself”
The lead is a mile beneath the sea. Everything is done by robot. The technology is unique to the oil industry. Doing the wrong thing can aggravate the issue. BP should have been prepared with the right, proven & tested response technology – - they weren’t.4. “Why doesn’t Obama sound angrier or show emotion, his optics aren’t good enough”
An entire evening of CNN is discussing his optics & whether he showed enough emotion to let the people know he cares. Maureen Dowd in NYTimes talks about his need to show emotion…. Gimme a break – the guy is not one of your fake emoters, ever since he’s been in office he’s been doing all he can for the American people….middleclass had lowest taxes since 1950, health reform will eventually stop exploitation of the American people by Pharma/insurers & lower costs (he has to repeal much of GOP 2003 bill’s actions to do so) & gets health care for the uninsured to save 50,000 lives annually, he has introduced consumer credit protection bill – GOP fights it, his Stimulus bill is loaded with help for the people…extension of unemployment benefits, he has reformed college loan process – cut out private bank subsidies & redirected the $60 billion into better rates/more loans & more help for community college, public education reform – kept jobs going for teachers, invested $’s in public education programs, DADT, Lily Ledbetter Act – equal pay for women. WHAT GODDAMN PROOF DOES THE MEDIA WANT THAT OBAMA CARES FOR THE PEOPLE?? He has done more for the American people in 16 months than GOP/Bush did in 8 years. He’s not an emotive guy, get over it. George W Bush was emoting so much he was nearly crying as he lied to the American people about WMD & what the war would cost USA….what do you prefer, lies+emotion optics, or actions+less emotional optics?5. “Obama is in bed with BP, that’s why he issn’t doing enough to stop the leak – he’s pro business, not the people”
One of Sarah Paline’s whoppers that the GOP likes to keep afloat.
BP contributed $4.4M to GOP since 1990 & $1.8M to Democrats.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000091Big Oil as a category contributed $188M to GOP & $61M to Dems
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/totals.php?cycle=2010&ind=E01In the top 20 highest lawmaker recipients of Big Oil funding, 18 are Republicans & the #1 & #2 are George W. Bush with $4.7M & John McCain/Sarah Palin with $2.7M! Obama is #10 with $973K & almost all was received in his presidential campaign year
1. Bush, George W. (R), $4,748,681
2. McCain, John (R-AZ), $2,677,064
3. Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX), $2,137,225
4. Gramm, Phil (R-TX), $1,682,814
5. Cornyn, John (R-TX), $1,638,450
6. Barton, Joe (R-TX) $1,447,880
7. Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $1,228,223
8. Pearce, Steve (R-NM) $981,272
9. Young, Don (R-AK) $980,263
10, Obama, Barack (D), $973,051
11. McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $860,261
12. Nickles, Don (R-OK), $841,388
13. Vitter, David (R-LA) $783,835
12. Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA), $757,744
13. Domenici, Pete V (R-NM,) $747,897
14. Conaway, Mike (R-TX) $651,718
15. Sessions, Pete (R-TX) $642,864
16. Tiahrt, Todd (R-KS) $618,773
17. Santorum, Rick (R-PA) $614,178
18. Granger, Kay (R-TX) $612,807
19. Burns, Conrad (R-MT) $605,386
20. Thune, John (R-SD) $575,762So who & which party does it look like “were in bed with BP & Big Oil”
6. BIG OIL, BIG INFLUENCE: The real blame lies with the last administration..Take your anger out on George Bush & Dick Cheney NOT Obama – they’re the ones that gave tax payers’ money to Big Oil companies in tax subsidies and changed the laws on drilling to protect Big Oil, not the American people or the US environment.
As PBS reported in August 2008:
During his first month in office, President George W. Bush appointed Vice President Dick Cheney to head a task force charged with developing the country’s energy policy. The group, which conducted its meetings in secret, relied on the recommendations of Big Oil behemoths Exxon Mobil, Conoco, Shell Oil, BP America and Chevron.In 2005, Bush, who has received more from the oil and gas industry than any other politician, signed an energy bill from the Republican-controlled Congress that gave $14.5 billion in tax breaks for oil, gas, nuclear power and coal companies. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was based on recommendations by Cheney’s energy task force, also rolled back regulations the oil industry considered burdensome, including exemptions from some clean water laws. All of this transpired only one year after Congress passed a bill that included a tax cut for domestic manufacturing that was expected to save energy companies at least $3.6 billion over a decade.
The energy companies that spend the most on lobbying the federal government also tend to be those that give the most to politicians for their campaigns. Since 2001, Exxon Mobil, Marathon Oil, Shell Oil, Chevron and BP America—many of which provided guidance to Cheney’s task force—have spent the most among energy companies on lobbying. Exxon Mobil and Chevron, in addition to El Paso Corp and Koch Industries, have been among the most generous campaign contributors within the industry during Bush’s time in office.
The top three members of Congress to receive money from Big Oil during the Bush administration are all Republicans and are, not surprisingly, all from oil-rich Texas. The big names include Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, both of whom have supported subsidies for gas and oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Also is Rep. Joe Barton, who sponsored the 2005 energy bill and was chair of the House Energy & Commerce Committee at the time. Fellow Texan Tom DeLay, who was the House Majority Leader in 2005 and was instrumental in pushing the energy bill through, also ranks among the top to receive money from the industry during Bush’s two terms. Of the 50 members of Congress who have received the most contributions from oil and gas companies since 2001, only six are Democrats.
-
Fred Carson says:
Wimp is right. but there is more. With evidence that BP is designing and drilling wells that are dangerous, why should we let them drill another well. These people are incompetent, irresponsible. There is already a good evidence, in my opinion, of heinous criminal activity.
I've heard come people question why BP is being allowed to drill a second well? They are giving allot of good reasons. Aside from what I said above. How can we expect better results from a second well with the same design, done on an emergency basis?
Are we going to let them get away with two deep wells with flawed design and incompetent, unscrupulous management? If there has been any concept proven here, is deep wells a dangerous, and at best requires more supervision and better design. Get BP away from both rigs.
If there is the threat rising oil prices, have the tankers that have been waiting for oil prices to rise and cause another dip in the economy and increased unemployment, suspend trading on the options market and have BP supply the US with gasoline at the current rate as partial payment for the damage they have already done.
Oil is big buisness, are we willing to let BP and all those big oil supporters the sell out the US for pennies on the dollar. Historically and most recently with the second gulf war, oil will use any excuse raise prices, and their appetite only increases.
The Israeli attack on the ship bound for Gaza makes me wonder. When you think about it, with current reserves and existing technology things could be better. There's a book "Blood in the Streets" that somebody mentioned that a family member of mine mentioned that describes the psychology of the whole thing.
Really, how can we trust people like this? The US is not a nation of chumps. Can we show these people, beginning with BP that we mean business.
-
My own frustrations have not been with whether or not a quick solution will be found for this leak – lazy journalists, a public's need for sensational story lines, and the inherent "good vs. evil" trope that undergirds practically every narrative form on television including news shows have created unreasonable expectations to feed our anxieties, not to provide us with good information with which to draw our own conclusions.
My own frustration is because even if our main news sources wanted to give us the facts about this spill, they couldn't, because there is very little reliable information available, beginning with the rate of flow from the blowout itself, that could help planners marshal the forces for a proportional response that actually has a chance of making headway.
Drilling one well that goes bad doesn't make BP any more incompetent than a doctor whose patient dies due to surgical error after the doctor has performed the same procedure hundreds of times.
It is the lying about it afterwards, and the stobewalling, and the obfuscation of information that is monstrous.
Leave a Reply
Featured
Connect
Washington Informer
Advertisement
.
.
.
.
WARNING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.
also the new method to be used by BP to (just try to) stop the oil spill (cut the oil riser, near the wellhead’s top, and put a valve with a pipe to pump up the oil to surface) has the main goal to “save the BP oil” (like all other, failed, methods used so far) but, this time, if the second part of the attempt (plug the just cutted riser) will FAIL, there will be NO FAST OR EASY WAY to stop the oil spill for at least TWO-THREE MONTHS, since, without the riser, BP can’t no longer adopt other, simpler, methods to stop the leak, like these:
.
they CAN stop the oil spill within TWO days!
.
http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/070oilspillsolution.html
.
.
.
.