Jane, let’s keep it real. Why the play at character assassination of Boone? This is beneath you. We can’t get the 2004 election back, I’m aware of the Swift Boat financing, etc. Boone has a more realistic energy plan out there than any of our elected officials; it’s centered on natural gas, not oil. And for readers who may not know, BP Capital is Boone’s company, NOT BP as in British Petroleum (or Beyond Petroleum). BP Capital to my knowledge has nothing to do with this accident. And watching that idiot from MSNBC ask if this was good news was just more than I could take. This spill, and the fact they can’t shut it off in a timely manner, is tragic news for a lot of people’s lives. Progressives (of whom I am one) would better promote our cause by sticking to facts and better hiding the glee some are exhibiting over this spill.

Hopefully Boone is correct and this spill will get cleaned up before it destroys the ecology of the entire gulf coast. As much as I’d like to share his optimism, the fact they couldn’t shut it off in the first 72 hours means they will have to resort to the “funnel” technique (2-4 weeks) or worse relief wells (3-4 months). For now, let’s hope they can effectively corral it. My forecast is this thing is going to get much worse despite significant efforts to contain it; there’s no need for exaggeration and hyperbole–the facts will speak for themselves.

Bobash, we know the score on Swift Boat funder T. Boone. We know all about his “energy plan” boondoggle and have for some time.

In honor of Rahm, several progressives in congress should approach BP with the following offer: We like you. Let us help you. We are prepared to introduce a bill, The BP Tart Reform Act. Any American, 21 years old or older, may buy into Medicare, provided they agree not to sue BP over the Gulf Coast oil spill.

Think about it.

Never waste a crisis.

T. Boone seems really dumb for a billionaire. Life is not fair.

PW, I’m not going to get into a debate of T. Boone’s character. That was my point with Jane–making T. Boone the issue might be fun and interesting, but it’s not constructive, and I wouldn’t defend him much. I will OTOH gladly discuss his energy plan–by which I mean “shift some of our transportation sector from oil to natural gas”–because I happen to believe it’s one of the more constructive ideas out there. I’m a Texan and am not informed on Prop 10 in California–so I’d concede those points mentioned in your link.

The biggest argument I’ve heard against Boone’s energy plan is that he stands to make a lot of money off of it. I believe this to be true, but not an argument against reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and our trade imbalance by moving the heavy fleet to nat gas. Nat gas is not zero ghg’s, but is about half that of diesel. And unlike oil, there’s plenty of it in the US due to recent finds in the context of fracking technology. Now there are environmental issues with fracking, but they could be managed. No one else has proposed anything better for our transportation fleet; the status quo is seriously problematic. I don’t mind public educations if you can show me I’m wrong.