I like everyone else in the country is getting so annoyed with the lack of real progress in the cleanup efforts in the aftermath of the BP oil spill. I could go into all the issues on both sides of the drilling argument but this blog would never end. I do want to throw out this thought with regard to all the chatter of a Boycott against the oil giant. While I do see the “symbolism” of such a movement, and of course I can see the potential financial damage that so many want to inflict as punshishment for this horrible accident, but here’s another point of view. Why do we want to run the company in the ground when it’s going to take billions of dollars to clean up and compensate people for the damages so many have suffered? See if BP stays in business and we keep buying gas from them, the y will be able to keep spending all those profits by finishing the clean up, and then paying damages to all the people whose lives have be ruined because of the accident. If we say boycott and drive them into bankruptcy, then guess that will end up having to foot the bill for the clean up? Yup the American tax payer and bankruptcy would also mean they wouldn’t have to pay damages to all those people and the economy of the gulf coast would probably never recover.  Just a thought on how to do what you do every day, (buy gas), and avoid tax money being used for cleaning the beaches and waterways, and assure that BP is around to compensate those who have lost so much. 

The other thought is this. Somebody tell me they are as mad as I am the Yearn Vander Sloot, was given money in a F.B.I. extortion sting, and before the F.B.I. finally decided to open the indictment he took the money he was given in the sting operation, and promptly flew to Peru and allegedly  killed another girl. I mean The F.B.I. in Alabama had the evidence, and a sealed indictment in there possession as of May 10th, they could have filed it, got a warrant for his arrest, and had him extradited from Aruba, and this second young lady wouldn’t have been murdered!