Thursday, 10 June 2010

Obama's Anti-British Venom

It has consequences, this incomprehensible, outmoded, spiteful anti-British venom of Obama's.

For instance, for it to be sustained, this poor President must deny the reality of the true impact of his cheaply political, unthinking, bargain-basement, anachronistic Brit-bashing. That 'true reality' is framed rather neatly by Iain Martin this evening:

If President Obama can break off from crafting his next anti-British Petroleum soundbite, it might be worth him checking out the ownership structure of BP and pausing for a moment. It appears that 39% of the shares in the company are American owned (25% by U.S. pension funds and 14% by individual American investors). According to BP’s figures, 40% of the stock is owned in the U.K.

So, the company not paying, limiting or delaying payment of its dividend (as Mr. Obama has demanded as retribution for BP causing him so many problems — no, I mean desecrating the Gulf of Mexico) would impact directly on rather a lot of American investors, and those with pensions.

Who is going to tell the president? Perhaps it could be British Prime Minister David Cameron, when the pair talk on Saturday in an attempt to limit the diplomatic damage from the crisis.

No wonder serious US stockmarket commentators are getting a little nervous about Obama's loud mouth. BP is a massive multinational, with investment interests in the US that at least parallel those of the UK - and we're talking hundreds of billions here, all told - not just market value. If BP Plc goes down, which is what the idiot Obama and his fellow administration coat tail morons seem to want, then BP Inc will have already died - and that one, giant company's politically induced failure could take the entire, fragile world economy down with it.

Taking out a company as big as BP just because you want to look tough could trigger another depression - globally. People should understand that that's the desperate game Obama has chosen to play, but just doesn't understand.

This terrible political decision tree should be seen for what it is, and then he (Obama) should be seen for what he really is, and then, once the dawn of clarity has finally set in, anything he says or does from here on in should be stoically resisted, on both sides of the Atlantic.

The fact that Cameron hasn't even made a decent position statement on this travesty yet tells me one thing, however. Ordinary Americans and Brits still have at least one thing in common: our respective political leaders are basically first order and ineffective world class shits!

Now that's the real "Special Relationship" that I've had the privilege of enjoying for many decades (thanks to my roots).


  1. Quite. And you know why Obama is acting as he is? He spent his election campaign arguing against John McCain's view that there should be more offshore drilling, and then back-pedalled on it after the election. He's obviously afraid someone will notice, and ask why he didn't keep his election promises.

  2. Dead right.

    Apologies for getting it so wrong that last time, Adam. It happens (especially with me ;).

  3. Sooner or later, if Obama continues the way he's doing, BP will get fed up and decide that it's not paying a cent more. It has, after all and to the best of my understanding, already gone astronomically over its liability cap (under US law). Obama is testing BP's goodwill beyond breaking point.

    Up until recently I was a cautious supporter of Obama, based on pragmatism and the dreadful record of the previous president, but what with his attitude on life-issues (I'm a Catholic and his staunch defence of abortion bothers me in particular) and now this crass populism and unfounded demonisation of things apparently British - and therefore 'foreign' and thus fair game - has seriously pissed me off.

    He was elected on the back of all this hope, but he's turned into something much grubbier, reminiscent of Brown, in fact, in his tendency to demonise anything he can't control or take credit for or that would somehow, in its demonisation, be useful in shoring up his own image.

    In other words, he's showing his true nature as a craven politician, rather than the statesman this country hoped in vain for.

  4. I'm a Catholic too, Tony, according to my strict upbringing.

    Tough, being yourself, ain't it?


Any thoughts?