Bill O'Reilly of Fox News's "The O'Reilly Factor" sometimes has some good ideas. Sometimes. I have to say, I disagree with this guy more often than not. It seems that on those issues where he is a liberal, which are few, I am conservative, and on those majority of issues where he seems to be conservative, I am liberal. However, there are a few issues where we are in agreement, and his idea concerning the energy companies is one good example.
The idea? That American oil companies should voluntarily take a 20% reduction in profits, for the good of the country, by keeping gas prices low, or as low as possible. Of course, this will never happen. And when the idea was broached to President Bush recently by Dianne Sawyer, he actually cut her off, saying that he had faith in the generosity of the American people to contribute and see the country through this crisis.
Yeah, the motherfucker wants the average citizen to fork over a few dollars here and there and thinks that this is going to make up for the lack of planning and accountability of his administration, and Congress. He thinks getting his dad and Bill Clinton to encourage people to donate is going to pull us throgh this? Outrageous. The oil companies make billions of dollars in profits, and this bastard can't even begin to think to consider the possibility of just asking his oil company cronies to voluntarily, mind you, take a reduction in their sacred proifits-for the good of the country, presumably as much their country as everyone elses. Actually, I guess it is their country, sold, brought, and paid for, that's just the fucking problem.
One of O'Reillys guests last night said this would be wrong, it would be price controls, which wouldn't work, at which point O'Reilly reminded him that he was talking about a voluntary reduction, but no-the guest insisted that this wouldn't work, the proper thing to do would be to let the market work. O'Reilly held his temper with difficulty. But he should have known better. Of course the oil company bosses aren't going to take a reduction in profits, for the good of the country or of anyone else. They also aren't going to agree to pay higher taxes, for the good of the country. Why should O'Reilly be surprised at this. One would hope that he would see now that those tax cuts he himself supported are good for one thing only-the ever deepening pockets of the recipients of the tax cuts, who seldom trickle anything down to the rest of us, unless they happen to be pissing out a window at the time we're passing by.
