Posted by 
Rhetoric this week across all media channels, new and traditional, left and the right, rose to record levels, as journalists, bloggers and tweeters, bombarded the Internet and airwaves raising the question: Should President Obama show more anger and emotion?
The uptick in activity comes at a time of increasing public outrage at the response rate of UK-based oil giant BP, who still after 54 days, cannot stop the leak in the Gulf of Mexico, which continues to spill millions of gallons of crude onto the Louisiana coastline.
Spinnernation has reported on the Transocean rig explosion since April 20. It’s no secret that BP CEO Tony Hayward has done a poor job of communicating during this disaster. Failure to effectively communicate during this crisis, only has added fuel (no pun intended) to the public outrage, prompting citizens to cast blame. Who? President Obama, of course, for not being “angry” enough.
There are myriad mistakes ranging from regulation failures to response efforts that need to be addressed at some point. This crisis will undoubtedly have all entities involved finding new ways to make off-shore drilling safer and more productive, or moving towards an alternative energy infrastructure altogether.
BP wants to stop the leak. Every gallon of oil spilled is lost revenue. That means fewer profits. At the moment, the company is best qualified to stop the leak, which is the first priority. There’s really nothing the president can do or say to make BP move faster. We can scream and yell and point blame, but at the end of day, that does more harm than good.
Cooler heads will prevail in the end, hopefully. President Obama is being “presidential,” as he should be, understanding the true reality of the situation. Adding to the rhetoric to appease voters, may indeed help with the “politics” of the crisis, but not help with the disaster at the moment. Maybe this is the message the Obama administration should be sending, than worrying about who’s ass to kick.