Sandy Hook
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Murkowski Says Yes To Big Oil
One of the definitions of a prostitute is, "a person who willingly uses his or her talent or ability in a base and unworthy way, usually for money." So, if you're getting over $400,000 a year from a bunch of guys in a particular industry, does that make you a whore?
And what does it make you when you side with your "financial backers over the public interest"? A brazen hussy.
In the wake of last month's catastrophic Gulf Coast oil spill, Sen. Lisa Murkowski blocked a bill that would have raised the maximum liability for oil companies after a spill from a paltry $75 million to $10 billion. The Republican lawmaker said the bill, introduced by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), would have unfairly hurt smaller oil companies by raising the costs of oil production. The legislation is "not where we need to be right now" she said.
Well I sure would hate for the little bitty oil companies to get hurt while thousands of gallons of oil a day are pouring into the Gulf, threatening the entire ecosystem, the wetlands, the marine life, the coastline, the fishing industry and the tourist industry, and the quality of life of its inhabitants for decades to come.
I wonder just where Mukowski thinks this legislation should be right now. I wonder if she's considered, or if she even cares, where the money is going to come from to pay for the cleanup and all the other fallout from this disaster. I wonder if she thinks about those 11 men who were killed - and their families. I wonder if she thinks.
Murkowski's move came just hours after Washington's top oil lobby, the American Petroleum Institute (API) expressed vociferous opposition to raising the cap. It argued that doing so would "threaten the viability of deep-water operations, significantly reduce U.S. domestic oil production and harm U.S. energy security." API's membership includes large oil companies like ExxonMobil and BP America, as well as smaller ones.
An API spokeswoman told TPMmuckraker that the bill represented "a knee-jerk reaction that could have unintended consequences." she added: "It's important that the Senate did vote it down."
In fact, the Senate didn't vote on the bill. Thanks to Senate procedures, Murkowski was able to block it simply by objecting to a voice vote request on the bill.
It's not clear that Murkowski's move will end up affecting how much BP and Transocean pay. The White House told TPMmuckraker last week that if the courts find BP to have been "grossly negligent or to have engaged in willful misconduct or conduct in violation of federal regulations," -- which would seem likely -- then the $75 million cap disappears. And there will likely be further efforts in the coming days to raise the cap.
(. . .)
Menendez was scathing in response to Murkowski's move, telling reporters: "Either you want to fully protect the small businesses, individuals and communities devastated by a man-made disaster -- this is not a natural disaster; this is a man-made disaster -- or you want to protect multibillion-dollar oil companies from being held fully accountable. Apparently there are some in the Senate who prefer to protect the oil companies."
If you are as angry as I am and if you want to scream at the top of your lungs, here's a couple of ways to go about it:
Senator Murkowski’s office phone number is 202-224-6665.
Her email is http://murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact
Ifidel753 provides this link to sign a petition to save the Clean Air Act. Guess who's trying to kill it?
Ya gotta wonder what kind of thingy is in the water up there in Alaska.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A Murkowski in bed with Big Oil? Call me disillusioned...
ReplyDeleteDeep sea drilling is the definition of a knee-jerk reaction with unintended consequences. Or maybe Big Oil knows and doesn't care that a well is going to blow sooner or later.
When Murkowski's daddy handed her that job, he knew his little Lisa was both an idiot and a filthy whore-but he knew there was one thing that she DOES know how to say "NO!" to. Of course, that would be anyone trying to put any kind of a curb on big oil.
ReplyDeleteAlaskans love big oil. After all, each and every Alaskan recieved $1305 from the Alaskan Permanent Fund, funded by the oil companies.
ReplyDeleteTaking from the rich oil companies and giving to the citizens sounds like a socialist redistribution of wealth to me. And I thought Alaskans always talked about how independent and free-spirited they were.
Oh, and guess who receives the highest per capita return on their federal tax dollar? Why it is those "pull yourself up by your bootstrap" Alaskans.
Sounds like a socialist state to me.
The $1305 is the 2009 dividend.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's not like the people of Murkowski's state — Alaska — have any reason to be suspicious of oil companies' good intentions.
ReplyDeleteOy!
"Prostitute" is the operative word here. It also fits Sen. James Inhofe of the oil- and gas-producing state of Oklahoma. Inhofe is in on the hold as well, from what I understand.
Well, I'm glad Murky is trying to protect those tiny mom-and-pop deep-sea drilling companies from being driven out of the market. If it weren't for liability issues, obviously a type of business that requires billions of dollars worth of equipment would be open to competitors of any size, just like any kid can open op a lemonade stand.
ReplyDelete[/sarcasm]
This is as blatant a case of pandering to big contributors as was Lieberman during the HCR bettle.
I'm a little uncomfortable about comparing politicians to prostitutes, though. Prostitutes provide a legitimate service and aren't engaged in gross dereliction of duty toward anyone else.
K and JR: You're both right, of course, but something is wrong with a procedure that allows one person to block a vote.
ReplyDeleteJC: I wonder if those effected by the Valdez spill would be willing to trade the $1305 for all that they lost.
SW: Prostitutes give and receive AIDS -
Infidel: Wow, you're in rare form today. Note comment to SW.
Big Oil pays almost the entire cost of running Alaska's state government plus a little share in profits for all their rdesidents. It's a cheap way for Big Oil to keep the Repuglicans in power there.
ReplyDeleteThe following true story has been slightly amended for the sake of semi-relevance: Frodo's father, upon his draft into the US Army in WWII (in which he won a Good Conduct Medal), stood in line as each name was called, in alphabetical order. ". . .Mulder. . .here, Sergeant. . .Mumford. . .here, Sergeant. . .Mumaw. . .here, Sergeant. . .Murk, I Mean Morkoskie, or is it Merkazie, Jesus Christ!. . .here Sergeant!"
ReplyDeleteThe name was Murkowski.
"Well I sure would hate for the little bitty oil companies to get hurt while thousands of gallons of oil a day are pouring into the Gulf"
ReplyDeleteIf a small oil company has just one platform in the Gulf, and this BP thing happens to their one oil platform, they deserve the high liability too.
---------------
Infidel said: "This is as blatant a case of pandering to big contributors as was Lieberman during the HCR bettle."
Yeah, I'm glad that Lieberman and his backers lost out. Imagine the alternative: huge profits for the health insurance industry when the government forces people to become their customers against their will.
Oh wait....