"Skocpol Responds to Reich on what Obama should do"

[ProSense]

Skocpol Responds to Reich

Josh Marshall

Skocpol Responds to Reich on what Obama should do ...

I like Bob Reich and consider him a friend, but he is nuts. (see article Skocpol is responding to here) There is a reason why the right, including Sarah Palin, is calling for Obama to "take charge" of the BP disaster, including fixing the leaking pipe. This is a problem that cannot be solved, and probably will not be for many months. They want Obama to directly own it so they can reinforce their message that government does not work. Why should liberals, stupidly, be pushing for this? I cannot figure out what the left and many liberal pundits think they are doing in all this.

When a huge private corporation makes a mess and cannot fix it, it is sheer lunacy to take direct charge of that mess unless you can fix it right away.

Obama and the government can (a) hold BP accountable in criminal and financial terms; and (b) orchestrate the mitigation, restitution, and financial help for the regions affected. They are doing this and should be as visible as possible about steps in both areas. The last thing they should do is take charge of fixing the leak itself when they cannot.

[babylonsister]

1. Common sense. Rec'd. nt

[Jakes Progress]

16. Not common sense. Political strategy maybe.

But not the kind of sense where you actually want to do something good once you are in office. But I agree that trying to do the right thing may be bad for his political career. He just needs to decide which is more important.

[Phx_Dem]

2. Reich is an idiot for making such an idiotic suggestion. n/t

[Cha]

8. Reich is good but no one is perfect. and this is one

of those times. This is key..

"This is a problem that cannot be solved, and probably will not be for many months. They want Obama to directly own it so they can reinforce their message that government does not work. Why should liberals, stupidly, be pushing for this? I cannot figure out what the left and many liberal pundits think they are doing in all this."

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. Rec'd for sound reasoning. (nt)

:kick:

[depakid]

10. unrec'd for deceidely unsound reasoning

and unlike some, I actually suffered through reading the article.

[flpoljunkie]

4. Agree with Skocpol on this, not Reich.

[amborin]

5. K&U for bad reasoning; why is BP still dumping Corexit? dissing the EPA; lying about the magnitud

of the spill; lying and obfuscating still?

and putting profits ahead of public safety! Obama and the feds would NOT OWN the disaster; it was BP's disaster; but to continue to allow BP to screw around, defy the fed gov't, do a half assed cleanup, etc....is making the feds look totally incompetent


BP should be put into receivership and/or discretionary disbarment

the feds would not own it; they would simply be preventing further devastation

[tledford]

6. Gotta agree with you.

It's time to drop the bomb on the well, like the Russians suggested a month ago. Yes it will render it unusable. What a shame. :-)

[damonm]

11. U to you for your bad reasoning...

Politically, the feds WOULD own it. The longer it goes on w/o a solution will only cement that in the public mind.

[amborin]

12. au contraire; the longer the feds allow BP to screw around w/ both containment & cleanup, it's BAD

[depakid]

14. BP's announcement that they'd go right ahead with dividend payouts isn't looking too good

for the administration at the moment either.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/03/gulf-oil-spill-bp-dividend

[amborin]

15. no, it's not; and they are making a mockery of this admin in so many ways, such as Corexit, for star

ters

[Hawkowl]

21. Brilliant

Seriously. I do not understand why many of our so called liberals don't scream this to everyone, every minute of every day. I know I do.

[Cha]

7. It's guarnteed that anything that comes out of that motormouth's

moosehole is not good for the country and has some asshole motive.

[depakid]

9. When articles are prefaced like this one it's easy to see what's coming....

-and it's generally not going to be very sensible.

[amborin]

13. SAD! Theda is wrong; but if she were right, she puts politics over what is ethically correct

she's essentially saying: it would not be good politically for feds to take over.....

well, first, she's wrong in that assertion;

but imagine she were right, for the sake of the argument: she's effectively saying: politics trumps ethically/morally correct actions

for make no mistake: the ethical thing to do is to NOT allow BP to fuck up any longer, both with containment and with cleanup

they need to be put into receivership, monitored, etc....the safety of the public and the environment should take precedence over profits


you'd have to understand where Theda is coming from theoretically to appreciate why she's arguing this;

[Jakes Progress]

17. What's a few millions dead birds, and a ruined ecosystem

and several millions families without a means of support as long as you can have a chance to get re-elected. It's a matter of priorities.

[ProSense]

18. She's absolutely accurate, it's nuts. This makes no sense

for make no mistake: the ethical thing to do is to NOT allow BP to fuck up any longer, both with containment and with cleanup

they need to be put into receivership, monitored, etc....the safety of the public and the environment should take precedence over profits

You keep repeating this, but what does it mean? Reich's solution is receivorship leaving BP responsible for the gusher.

Ending the gusher is key to any solution.

[amborin]

19. she'd only be right if political expediency were paramount; even w/ that goal in mind, she's wrong

[Cha]

20. Kick