This is why BP is rightly bearing the brunt of the blame in the process (yes, contrary to what I might have thought and posted a month ago). While Halliburton personnel had some involvement and Transocean built the rig, it appears that most of the critical decisions that came back to haunt the project were driven by BP. What I've heard from people who know more is that BP was doing some things that they would not consider doing ever. That's frustrating given BP's recent history. On the other hand, I know a couple of BP managers who claim that the Obama administration has been blatantly two-faced in this. Essentially, he (or his people) have said one thing in meetings and then come out with completely different statements in press conferences less than 24 hours later. There's no question that Obama's silly attempts at tough talk have been him playing politics . . . badly.

Tony Hayward has to have been one of the most inept crisis managers of all time. How could BP not have better public relations advice? They clearly didn't learn from Johnson & Johnson (Tylenol).

The incident will likely lead to increased regulation. That may prove problematic as the government personnel involved have to take a massive leap in competence to do so effectively. The only way to make that happen is to pay enough to get the right people involved and make it attractive for them to stay. Overall cost of deep water drilling will go up. I'd say it is important that it not go up too much, too fast. You might disagree.

Obama's arbitrary six-month ban on new drilling projects needs to be reviewed. Operators ought to have the right to prove themselves and get off the "list" earlier. Conceptually, I don't have a problem with the ban, but why six months? This is crying out for a purpose-fit solution.

The government might want to consider getting all offshore drillers to buy into a cleanup fund/rainy day fund concept. Insurance.