[A note: all picture captions in this article are also links to further documentation. Feel free to click and explore.]
OK. I'm pretty sure we all agree that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is an immense disaster, the scope of which boggles the mind. (Pictured: Obama golfing, April 23rd, 2010.)But I'm also sure some of you have been reading my articles alleging a cover-up with at least some degree of skepticism, as I have been known to theorize about things that - while strictly theory - are interesting to me as intellectual exercise.
So, let me ask you: is it merely theorizing, merely intellectual exercise, when I say that BP and the government have been covering up the magnitude of the disaster unfolding under the Gulf all along? (Pictured: Obama golfing, April 24th, 2010.)
Is it?
Is it REALLY?
I'm not alone in thinking of government collusion; OilPrice.com posted an article alleging the same thing over a month ago. But without supporting documentation, without much in the way of confirmatory linkage, their claims were easy, no doubt, for the government faithful to dismiss.
Does the fact that Rahm Emanuel's rent-free apartment in Washington, DC is owned by a BP adviser and lobbyist, whose firm was awarded hundreds of thousands of dollars by a committee headed by Rahm Emanuel, make anyone suspicious? (Pictured: Obama golfing, May 8th, 2010.)
Because it should.
If it's true, right?
I mean, that kind of obvious conflict of interest can't possibly be true, right?
Except that kind of back-room deal has been a hallmark of this government. (Pictured: Obama golfing, May 11th, 2010.)
Except that this kind of thing appears to be business as usual for the Obama administration. (Think Sestak.)
So, here we are, approaching the 50th day of oil spilling into the Gulf, with no end in sight, and oil plumes - those underwater formations of undispersed oil that BP CEO Tony Hayward says don't exist - are now being found as far as 142 miles from the Deepwater Horizon rig.
Echoing the arguments used to prevent domestic drilling - "it won't be ready soon, so let's not start it, that way it will never be ready" - the government is insisting that my idea, that of using empty tanker ships to vacuum the oil out of the ocean, cannot be used because the ships aren't ready. Why aren't they ready? They've had almost two months; the answer is because they thought it would take too long to get ready, and therefore never started the process of getting them ready, thus ensuring that they would never be ready. (Pictured: Obama golfing, May 15th, 2010.)
So why?
Why is this government so paralyzed in this crisis?
The answer is simple.
One of the Obama Administration's mantras has been, "never let a good crisis go to waste."
This is, by any standard, a good crisis. (Pictured: Obama golfing, May 16th, 2010.)
And it's one that involves the oil industry, one of leftists' pet bugaboos.
Which means that - as with shootings followed by attempts at new gun control laws - there's an opportunity here for massive parts of the leftist agenda, namely, Cap And Trade, and the nationalization of the oil companies, to gain public traction, something they were unable to achieve before.
That's analysis, and opinion, as yet; don't worry, as soon as they (in my view inevitably) start making moves towards those goals, I will post documentation.
But what other real reason could the government have to try to cover up the scope of the spill? Surely not to make it a far more terrifying scenario when the actual extent of the damage is finally made public, so as to more easily scare the public into compliance with their "regrettably necessary" measures? (Pictured: Obama golfing, May 22nd, 2010.)
Oh, wait, let me back up.
You're still not convinced the government has been covering anything up, are you.
BP released video to the federal government showing not one, but three leaks, one far more massive than either of the others, weeks ago. (Pictured: Obama fundraising for DNC, April 29th, 2010.)
And yet, despite that information being available to the government all along, the video that's made it to the news has been that one little broken pipe, which even so displayed that the "official" 5,000 barrels per day figure simply could not be accurate.
Why?
What purpose does it serve to tell the public that everything's fine, when it clearly isn't?
Especially when there's a convenient scapegoat - BP - right there, just begging to get beaten for their malfeasance?
Unless you ARE planning to nationalize BP.
I remember something... wait, what WAS it... about wanting to nationalize the oil companies some time back... Some Californian... Congresscritter...
Oh, right, Maxine Waters!
See, this has been their plan for years and years; the oil companies make boatloads of money, and what better way to bankroll your communism than to nationalize the oil companies and have all those boatloads of money to do it?
In fact, Presidential adviser and former Clinton-era Secretary of Labor Robert Reich just wrote a column last week advocating exactly that. (Pictured: Obama has time for the Correspondents' Dinner, May 2, 2010.)
Nationalize the company, then Obama can stop the leak using his Magic President Powers, instead of doing what I have been advocating.
My solution would be two-fold; first, ignore the nay-sayers, ready the tankers for oil removal - since it has been tried before and worked just fine - and have them go vacuum up the oil and carry it away. (Instant cleanup.) Stop delaying - every delay merely makes it worse - and DO IT.
Second, since BP is at fault here - clearly - and thus responsible legally for the costs of both cleanup and repair to the site already, the President should request - note that word, which is different from "demand," the assistance of the American oil companies, and require BP as part of its legal liability to pay the other companies for their assistance in capping the leak. (Pictured: Obama meets with Bono, April 30th, 2010.)
Neither of those elements is unworkable; in fact, BP is in far greater danger than they seem to realize, since the $75 million cap on damages that seems to be keeping them from panic doesn't apply if it turns out that they violated safety regulations, which has ALREADY been proven and documented. This fact could simply drive BP into receivership; without a cap on damages of some kind, a jury is likely to award the plaintiffs, who will likely include the State of Louisiana and the federal government, the sun, moon, and stars by way of compensation.
Meanwhile, Obama admits to a press conference that he - and the federal government - knew this was going to be a major disaster from day one.
Really?
Then why did you go golfing, hmmm? SEVEN TIMES since the Deepwater Horizon blew up.
Why did it take you a month to go even take a look at the situation down there yourself? (Pictured: Obama finally goes to Louisiana, May 2, 2010.)
Because he's busily not wasting the crisis, of course. This is a great time for golf, since everyone else is at work, worried about the results and ramifications of this catastrophe; this is a great time for Obama to have the links to himself.
