Bankruptcy Won’t Help BP Avoid Costs
“It’s highly unlikely the claims would be so large that BP would pay any valid claims less than in full. The environmental claims and other claims would all ride through bankruptcy and be paid in the normal course.”
-bankruptcy lawyer Martin Bienenstock of Dewey & LeBoeuf, who advised General Motors Co. and Chrysler Financial Corp. in their bankruptcies.
>
FYI:
“BP Plc, whose potential liability for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has lawmakers and analysts raising the specter of bankruptcy, would be unlikely to avoid paying claims by seeking court protection, restructuring experts said.
The spill, the worst in U.S. history, threatens wetlands, wildlife, fishing and tourism in five states. BP has spent more than $1.43 billion to stop the leak and clean it up, and to compensate local businesses and residents since the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.
The U.K. energy company faces more than 200 lawsuits, and the U.S. is assessing the cost of restoring natural resources destroyed or fouled by the spill. BP’s liabilities include $37 billion in cleanup and potential litigation expenses, according to a June 2 Credit Suisse report. While a U.S. bankruptcy may halt many claims, it wouldn’t allow BP to avoid paying for most of the cleanup and damages, said New York bankruptcy lawyer Martin Bienenstock of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP.”
Interesting stuff . . .
>
Source:
BP Bankruptcy Would Offer No Protection From Costs
Margaret Cronin Fisk and Linda Sandler
Bloomberg, June 15 2010
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aH.LE356FwQY&
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
June 15th, 2010 at 6:22 am
Unfortunately for BP, it is a victim of its own success.It has reaped so many billions of dollars in windfall profits from fossil fuels over the year,that even a massive $30-35 Billion Dollar bill will still keep it solvent.
June 15th, 2010 at 7:05 am
And here it comes the 2nd stimulus mini-package courtesy of BP .)
June 15th, 2010 at 8:16 am
This problem cannot be fixed with money.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6593#comment-648967
Chances are good that this will be a global event that alters the course of humanity. Proponents of the unbridled use of fossil fuels like to say that there’s no problem we could cause that mother nature couldn’t overcome. Looks like we’re the problem.
June 15th, 2010 at 8:37 am
something tells me that, while, 11-digits sounds like a large #, the truer Cost of this problem will be in the 12-digit range (if our Luck holds)..
New Orleans is, still, an active Port..if we have to re-direct the Mississippi to flush the Oil out of the Southern Lousiana marshes..
that’d be 11-digits, easy, right there, alone..
some background on the area:
http://la.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/ecology.htm
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Gulf_of_Mexico_large_marine_ecosystem
http://article.wn.com/view/2010/06/09/Ongoing_Gulf_oil_spill_wreaking_havoc_for_marine_ecology_0/
June 15th, 2010 at 8:42 am
Marcus Aurelius: exactly.
Before it’s over, everything else humanity is doing will pale in comparison and become moot in the not-so-long run. If the ocean dies from not only this oil pollution (and the attendant gases) but also the on-going pollution we continue to dump (see Pacific Gyre or vortex small continent of plastic waste that hasn’t been cleaned up and is killing lots of birds and marine life) into it and the atmosphere, we will become as extinct as the many other species we’ve pushed there over the course of our “great” run of “civilization” in a very short time (relative to our past existence).
It’s like we’ve been commiting slow suicide as a species since the Industrial Revolution. Many people have pointed out along the way the many problems we’ll face if we don’t “straighten up and fly right”, but as usual, greed finds a way to subvert what’s necessary for long term survival to capitalize on short term gain. Humanity has become too stupid to exist (because we failed to learn from our mistakes or heed warnings).
June 15th, 2010 at 8:45 am
mathman:
I once, on another blog, as a good place to apply stimulus, proposed building a fleet of sweeper ships to collect all of that floating plastic garbage (in both major oceans, BTW). I was thoroughly laughed down. So much for sanity.
June 15th, 2010 at 9:15 am
Robespierre,
Amen, Obama will he handing out checks personally.This will become a virtual WPA cleaning up oil spills. US wants a big escrow but they will front the money, they need to get the wheels turning in the Gulf Coast.
I expect BP will start stonewalling once O’B sets them up as public enemy #1, no more Mr Niceguy, they’ll slip from delay to deny, they will have nothing to lose
June 15th, 2010 at 9:55 am
BP will effectively become like Fannie and Freddie, all its US assets nationalized in order to pay those that can make any claim, reasonable or not, with the remains going for political payola. The Brits won’t be happy, (it is, after all, “British” Petroleum) but you know, what can they do about it?
The US and Venezuala are not so far apart as we’d like to think.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:03 am
The well from hell tolled the bell for Obama. He was widely touted as proclaiming that the GoM will be in better shape than it was before the oil deluge. One could say that the deluge rendered him delusional.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:21 am
The liability cap for offshore drilling is $75 million
The Senators debating a retroactive change in this cap are the same Senators who have NOT passed any legislation on estate taxes. See the attached about the 74th wealthiest man dying in the ZERO estate tax window. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/business/09estate.html
The current situation is a perfect storm for not getting anything done on Big Oil reform. The extreme liberal Democrats, or the liberal posers who need to position as liberals to get re-elected, are talking a hard line. They call for the U.S. to put BP America assets into receivership or unlimited monetary caps on offshore drilling. The Big Oil flunkies in the Senate are trying to keep a low profile and raise as much campaign cash as they can. Big Oil, like Big Banks, are funding a toxic spill of campaign cash on Washington D.C.
Back to estate taxes. The members of the Duncan Family Lucky Sperm Club have $4 Billion in potential tax savings if they can stop a retroactive estate tax. I figure that only 30 Senators matter. The Dems have 40 intractable members and the the Republicans have 30 live free or die votes. The Duncans need only spend $1 million each on the 30 votes in play and hope to buy a handful. They can afford to spend $20 million each to run their own candidates in five states and buy the entire election instead of just one vote on one issue. The Pelosi/Reid Democratic agenda is dead. Poli Sci professors will be doing case studies for decades to ask why they only passed two major pieces of legislation in 16 months ($900 billion deficit spending give away and $2 trillion public health give away) The conservative minded should get down on their knees right now and thank God that Pelosi/Reid have managed to do so little.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:31 am
Ha!
——————–
BP (Houston, TX) Attorney – Exploration and Production
E&P (Exploration & Production) Lawyer to serve BP Gulf of Mexico Strategic Performance Unit with primary focus on deepwater offshore project support, procurement, exploration, production, and midstream issues.
Qualifications:
- JD Degree from an accredited U.S. law school or international equivalent
- A valid, active license to practice law in any state in the U.S. or an international equivalent; if not licensed to practice in Texas, should be willing and able to become licensed;
- At least 7-10 years experience in exploration and production legal practice; deepwater experience desirable.
- Experience working within a multi-disciplinary team.
- Excellent legal drafting and analysis skills and capabilities
- Ability to work interactively and collaboratively within a legal team structure on projects which have common owners or issues; strong team skills
- Self-motivated with the ability and drive to work independently and meet short term deliverables.
- Strong interpersonal and communication skills.
- Sound judgment and commercial awareness.
- Strong commitment to the achievement of excellence in HSSE performance.
- Strong commitment to a work environment of mutual trust and respect and where diversity and inclusion are valued.
Our business is the exploration, production, refining, trading and distribution of energy. This is what we do, and we do it on a truly global scale. With a workforce of 92,000 employees, BP operates with business activities and customers in more than 100 countries across six continents. Every day, we serve millions of customers around the world. We are continually looking for talented, committed and ambitious people to help us shape the face of energy for the future.
The purpose of the Legal function is to provide legal services to the Group in order to further the maximisation of business opportunities and value and the minimisation of business risks and liabilities.
BP Legal lawyers and support staff work closely with their colleagues in the Businesses, Regions and Functions to deliver exceptional results in transactions, disputes and issues management.
Building on its existing strength, BP Legal has developed its strategic priorities, in line with the Group Strategy, to achieve its vision and address present and foreseeable challenges.
If you are selected for the position, your employment will be contingent upon submission to and successful completion of a post-offer/pre-placement drug and alcohol screening as well as pre-placement verification of the information and qualifications provided during the selection process.
BP is an equal opportunity employer.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:36 am
BP will pay only 20% of the damages. Cost is not equal to damage!
Statements above about BP paying $100 Billion and up are confusing the idea of damages to the gulf and the environment and cost to BP. The damages are clearly on a path to exceed $100 billion. Every home within 10 miles of a fantastic beach on the gulf could lose 10% or more in value. I have put my home search for Sarasota, FL on hold until 2011 to see if the beach access value of these homes is damaged.
I think that most of the measurable damages will not get stuck on BP. Obama called for a six month ban on drillling and then wants BP to pay all the oil workers, not going to happen. BP will pay the visible cost of laying boom and then skimming oil for two years. They may even have some small repair to the gulf projects to pay for. The problem is that most of the damage to the environment, gulf property values, and long term fishing cannot be measure and will not be paid by BP.
If you think BP is a gonner, then I ask “What other stock in recent history has sufferred a prolonged and public death?” Worldcom, Enron, Lehman collapsed in a few months in dramatic flameouts.
June 15th, 2010 at 10:37 am
Can someone please explain to me, how Barack Obama and the Dems are getting away with destroying one of the most profitable and important companies in the world based largely on political considerations. There is no conclusive evidence to date that BP was negligent. Even if BP did not use the most expensive methods to ensure safety does not mean that what they did was negligent. His hard line approach is just a play to the left and in the mean time thousands of gulf workers are unemployed, millions of investors ( USA investors also) are losing pensions and savings. The spill is a terrible disaster and BP need to clean it up, but until gross negligence can proven, he seems to be way out of line.
June 15th, 2010 at 11:40 am
@Dapple
Agree with you as to Obama’s comments being out of line, especially the “Fire the CEO” request. that only works for American companies requesting bailouts like GM, or the threat to BAC.
The Democrats realize that Obama has a ginormous Katrina response problem. The difference is that BP is a visible target and no corporate villain stood up to take blame for Katrina. As long as the live streeming vido shows thousand of barrels a day blowing into the gulf nothing Obama does will get any credit. And, there is nothing Obama can do to stop the oil flow. Next hope is the relief wells in August.
Obama can organize industry experts for advice, visit the oil skimmers or the victims, talk about drilling bans or drilling safety. Nothing makes good sound bites like that live feed oil spill.
I think the shouting and posturing by Obama and the Democrats is a “drowing man” attempt to stop the political damage of the live oil feed. They are flailing away, bringing on exhaustion but no real progress, and in the end will accomplish nothing.
June 15th, 2010 at 11:41 am
@dapple:
BP, Halliburton, and Transocean are on the hook because $800 million shit doesn’t ordinarily explode, gushing millions of gallons of oil in the absence of negligence. Unless they can prove no negligence (burden shifts) and good luck to them with that.
June 15th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
@Transor Z:
Ah, the “guilty until proven innocent” argument. I forgot that was the new country we were living in, thanks for reminding us.
I for one suspect there probably was negligence involved (at a minimum, the decision to replace mud w/ sea water), but have no idea whether it was “gross” or not – and unless you were on that rig and are an industry expert, I doubt you do either. As a few others have said, they obviously cut corners and took less expensive options, but only a full investigation by experts will determine whether this was a series of really unfortunate bad decisions (see, Morton Thiokol, Challenger disaster, circa 1986) or criminal negligence. Space shuttle costs a little more than $800 million, and it was destroyed with a bad rubber O-ring. Anyway, whatever the determination is by whichever parties do the investigating, it will be argued for years in court.
I still think Dapple has a point that it’s out of line to presume guilt and vilify BP (deserved or not), especially when the primary motivation is to deflect blame that ought to be squarely directed at Obama and his administration for completely botching the containment and cleanup.
June 15th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
[...] BP (BP) catches a downgrade. Bankruptcy won’t help it avoid costs. (WSJ, Big Picture) [...]
June 15th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
>completely botching the containment and cleanup.
Uh, and how were they supposed to do this containment again? This was not a leaking ship you could put booms around. And yes, to prevent this, and with a full understanding of how many porn watching yahoos the Bushies planted in government regulatory agencies on top of the corrupt incentive systems all regulatory agencies were given, then yeah, he should have halted all off shore drilling on jan 20, 2009 and stopped this disaster from happening. That would indeed make it all his fault. I’ll agree with that.
This is so priceless. Republicans have been drowning government in a bathtub for 30 years and now whine when it doesn’t step in to magically swoop to solve one of the largest purely corporate caused u.s. disasters. Sorry, either the government is empowered and tooled up to do real regulation, or you can drink your oil spills and fucking enjoy them, they are exactly what you’ve been working toward all this time.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Bingo Darkness. Yet another example of “free market” hypocrites wanting Daddy Government there when THEY screw up to save THEIR hides. Didn’t we just see this on Wall Street as well? When will the Sheeple wake up to this con game and see it for what it is – a CON GAME?
June 15th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
@Darkness and Mannwich,
Lot’s of folks who comment on this blog love to avoid discussion or debate by painting others as either far-right or far-left, but that’s not what this is about.
Look at the facts objectively, and it is absolutely indisputable that the federal government is responsible for containment and clean-up. This is a fact, not an opinion. You may not like it, but I can’t help with that.
If your defense is that things like extra skimmer ships and/or the “supertanker stragegy” or any of the other ideas that haven’t at least been tried in the past 57 days wouldn’t have made a difference….well, you’ve made my point.
Now, go ahead and make some comment about me probably watching FoxNews all day and driving an SUV back and forth to the mall…and that will complete your point.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
@RF:
You hurt my feelings, because that was pretty fair legal commentary I offered earlier, if crudely expressed. I’m talking tort law; I don’t know what you’re talking about.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
@Radioflyer: I agree that the feds are responsible for the clean up, but why would anyone who doesn’t want gov’t in their lives in any way expect that (or anything outside of law enforcement and military) expect it? It just seems hypocritical to me.
And, by the way, if you’ve read enough of my comments here over the past three years, you’ll note that I tend to not get into the false left-right discussions (I used to but not anymore), so it’s not about that for me at this point. It’s about calling bullshit when I see it and I’ve been VERY critical of the O-man (and the Dems) since he took office. Ask franklin411.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
And I couldn’t care less about what you drive or what you do for fun so piss off.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
BP not negligent? I call BS. Read this laundry list of sh*t they f’ed up on:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100614/Hayward.BP.2010.6.14.pdf
June 15th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
@ mathman
“we will become as extinct as the many other species we’ve pushed there over the course of our “great” run of “civilization” in a very short time (relative to our past existence”
rather suspect that the “descent of man” from dominant species will be as long and slow as the ascent and just as dark and violent
June 15th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
@RadioFlyer:
A couple of clarifications.
1) I’m not sure what you meant by the statement, “it is absolutely indisputable that the federal government is responsible for containment and clean-up.” I think it would be more accurate to say the feds are responsible for coordinating containment and clean-up, however the oil companies are responsible for actually carrying out the containment and clean-up, or else footing the bill. http://blog.lawinfo.com/2010/05/27/president-obamas-oil-spill-clean-up-plan-will-there-be-a-new-oil-spill-czar/ I think most folks agree that the feds have been proactive in efforts at coordinating surface clean-up and containment, but are frustrated that the oil continues to billow out underwater. The feds have no expertise in plugging oil leaks a mile beneath sea level. If any organization has that sort of expertise, it is an oil company. But if so, and if the feds have oversight/coordination responsibility to get BP to stop the leak, isn’t it entirely reasonable for President Obama to jawbone BP to get the job done before the Gulf of Mexico become the Dead Sea?
2) Not sure where the talk of “gross negligence” comes from, apparently the $75 million cap on liability is lifted if ANY of the oil rig parties violated safety regulations. http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/04/news/companies/bp_legal.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2010060609 Care to take odds on that one?
June 15th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
@Mannwich: Then we both agree that the few extreme righties that are calling for more federal government help are indeed hypocritical – but I truly believe that is a relatively small (though often vocal) part of the populace.
That said, I don’t believe that’s an adequate response from people looking to let the current administration off the hook. “We” can debate the role of the federal government in countless aspects of society until the cows come home, but most would agree that even if the law didn’t require the federal government to take responsible during this disaster, they are the only possible entity (by far) on the planet that can coordinate the response and bring every resource possible to bear. Unless we’re going to call in the UN! (Sorry :)
Many of the same folks that vilified the Bush administration’s response to Katrina (which is completely different in size, scope, timeline, and most importantly – clarity of responsibility) after 2 days are now giving the current administration a pass after 2 months, and it’s really disheartening. It’s the way the world works, but it’s just sad to see, no matter what your politics are.
On a personal note, I’ve been lurking on this blog for a couple of years and only recently started posting comments here and there, but admittedly I’m not part of “the club” (NOT a pejorative) and do not know everyone’s subtle positions and/or personalities.
I think everything said on any form of electronic medium (blogs, email, etc.) is open to a fair degree of individual interpretation as to intent, tone, etc. – and I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else, so I hope you didn’t take my general comment too personally.
Just trying to have a little fun and engage in some good (if sometimes heated) debate. Others (either occasionally or constantly) like to deal in hyperbole and sling mud – that’s certainly fun as well.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Before I get attacked for being a hypocrite – I should have added that I like dealing in hyperbole and slinging mud as much as the next guy, so I’m not claiming the moral or logical high ground!
June 15th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
It’s all good, RadioFlyer. Can’t always agree all the time. Disagreeing is what makes these forums compelling (and fun).
June 15th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
BTW, to my point 1) above, it appears that several prominent members of the right wing media conceded that the federal government has zero ability to plug an oil blowout a mile below the surface of the sea, but have made a conscious decision to “demagogue the hell out of it” anyway: http://mediamatters.org/research/201006020061
June 15th, 2010 at 3:09 pm
@crankitt011,
Regarding your point 1 – I’m not associating with those “right wing media” folks, but I think most people (myself included) agree with them. Maybe I should have clarified that by “containment”, I meant containing the result of the spill, not stopping it at it’s source – which no sane person would argue the government could do better than the industry.
My gripe lies with the on-surface/on-shore response, which appears to be lackluster at best. Again, BP should be taken to task and pushed to do whatever it can – but that does not relieve the government from the ultimate responsibility (which you agreed they are) of cleaning it up. There are far too many resources sitting idle (foreign and domestic), and far too many “out-of-the-box” ideas languishing, for anyone to argue that the federal government is doing everything it can. I’m sorry that you’re not getting that point of view from Media Matters or Rachel Maddow, but there are other facts and opinions out there. (See, slinging mud :)
Regarding your point 2, you asked where talk of gross negligence comes from, but I think it was mentioned (among plenty of other places) in that article you linked to – a few words before your reference to “violating safety regulations”. Not sure what you’re getting at there.
June 15th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Mannwich said: “And I couldn’t care less about what you drive or what you do for fun so piss off.”
[Response in good humor]:
I know you don’t care, but I drive an S4 Avant and an M3 Convertible and enjoy scary movies, needlepoint, and long walks on the beach.
(I get a little bit of my gearhead fix with BR’s occasional car posts…but have to look elsewhere to scratch my needlepoint itch….)
June 15th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
@RadioFlyer:
“Regarding your point 1 – I’m not associating with those “right wing media” folks, but I think most people (myself included) agree with them. ” Agree that there is little the feds can rationally do to plug the leak, but that they should “demagogue the hell” out of the problem anyway?!
“There are far too many resources sitting idle (foreign and domestic), and far too many “out-of-the-box” ideas languishing, for anyone to argue that the federal government is doing everything it can. I’m sorry that you’re not getting that point of view from Media Matters or Rachel Maddow, but there are other facts and opinions out there. (See, slinging mud :)” I made a fact-backed, data-driven argument, and you come back with the old ad hominem, “Oh yeah, and you’re a dirty Lib!” reply. Who’s slinging mud, now? And as for those “other facts and opinions” on what else the feds could be doing to contain the surface spill, could you be more specific? That would be a more productive way to move the debate forward.
“Regarding your point 2, you asked where talk of gross negligence comes from, but I think it was mentioned (among plenty of other places) in that article you linked to – a few words before your reference to “violating safety regulations”. Not sure what you’re getting at there.” You seemed to think that the standard is gross negligence, so folks were unfairly assuming BP was guilty until proven innocent. My point is that the standard is a lot lower than gross negligence– there are very few people who don’t believe at least one of the oil rig parties violated safety regulations. Indeed, several of the parties have accused the others of doing so.
June 15th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
@crankit011, another follow up on your point 1, I also think the fact that the Deepwater Horizon was a Marshall Islands flagged ship means that the rig had to meet Marshall Islands safety regulations. Owned by a Swiss company, contracted by a British company, etc., etc. – AND operated and went down in international waters.
Again, I am by no means a maritime attorney (or any type of attorney), shipping expert, etc. – just a layperson learning as I go…but the point I would make is that this is not very likely to be a cut and dried slam dunk prosecution.
June 15th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
@crankit011, no, not agreeing with the demagoguery over the leak a mile down. Agree that there’s nothing Obama can do down there.
I admitted to the slinging mud/cheap shot – see my post(s) above. Again, just having fun with one of the sub-plots here and taking a little jab. Nothing personal and I apologize. If it makes you feel better, call me a Glenn Beck watcher. (I’m not a huge fan, but I watch occasionally, just like I watch Maddow occasionally. I usually cringe/throw my shoe at the TV at least once every 5 minutes when watching either.)
There are plenty of previous posts and comments over the past few weeks (both here and elsewhere) documenting the availability of other resources and proposed clean up solutions – like I said, you’re not going to read or hear about them in many media outlets, for many reasons. If this blog had permalinks to previous comments, I could direct you to some of my evidence, as well as others – but I’m not going to reinvent the wheel. If you’re interested, it won’t take long to find.
I’m guessing that you will marginalize them as “right wing conspiracy theories”, too insignificant to have an impact, or just complete nonsense….but I’m used to it.
June 15th, 2010 at 6:31 pm
@RadioFlyer:
“I’m guessing that you will marginalize them as “right wing conspiracy theories”, too insignificant to have an impact, or just complete nonsense….but I’m used to it.”
1) On what facts would you base that opinion?
2) I feel your pain.
June 15th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
@crankitt011, just a guess, not an opinion – but it was based on your prior comments in this thread. I interpreted some of your points and questions to mean that you are in (to some degree or another) the camp that feels that the government has done a reasonably good job and is on the right course in handling the cleanup. I may have misinterpreted your position, in which case, my guess was wrong.
Perhaps you were just asking for supporting information in order to advance your understanding of my position. I assumed you’d heard some of the rumblings (again, by me and lots of others – whether they be right, left or center) about supertankers, skimmers, the Jones Act, the EPA, better dispersants/absorbents, etc. – but again, maybe I was wrong. I didn’t mean to be rude or dismissive by not providing the info, I just didn’t have the time to gather the links.
June 16th, 2010 at 12:26 am
Dear Dapple,
BP is dead. Get used to it. Obama is not doing anything other then letting them dig their own grave. The other oil companies are talking about the cost of the drilling moratoriam, BP can pay them that, maybe even in equipment when they run out of money. The costs of the disaster are everywhere, how about the cost of the attorneys to argue for and against whole industries that are affected or soon to be.
100 billion is too small. 900 Trillion: That might cover it all, and it’s a nice round number, Paulson would approve, I think he was a republican.
@ Darkness, hear hear!
June 16th, 2010 at 8:18 am
Marcus Aurelius @ 8:45 am:…a fleet of sweeper ships to collect all of that floating plastic garbage (in both major oceans….. Actually a very good idea. It could be done for a few 100 million – drop in the bucket for BP.
June 16th, 2010 at 10:19 am
This is yet another confirmation that I am the perfect anti-liberal. I favor public funding of the cleanup and I hate public funding of health care, education, and retirement. BP performs a massive public service by making our machines go, this process does pose an environmental risk that we all accept, and we all need to pull together in this time of crisis. The only good to come out of this mess is its apparent effect on the dope’s perception of little o, although I myself hold his administration as blameless as I do BP. Even MSNBC is getting off its knees….Talk about a black swan.