What do the endlessly repeating cycle of futile Eurozone rescue talks and the endlessly repeating cycle of futile annual UN climate summits have in common? Put more plainly, what accounts for the unreality of both efforts, such that "breakthrough" agreements are soon recognized to be ineffective, if not fraudulent?

While BP should be legally liable for the damages stemming from the Gulf oil spill, the punishment for BP should come through due process, not the show trials being pursued by the president and Congress.

Following recent comments, Barack Obama is in danger of becoming a figure of ridicule, which is particularly ominous for a presidency that runs almost entirely on high-octane rhetoric.

President Obama's response to the Gulf oil spill is an unflattering example of ineffective thuggery, as he orders around BP's executives, ignores due process, and caters to his union supporters.

President Obama's proposal to reinstate taxes for the Superfund, the federal program that finances the cleanup of toxic sites but has almost nothing to do with the oil spill, emphasizes that the more the Obama administration attends to not letting a crisis go to waste, the worse the crisis gets.

The hysteria of the media and the political class over the Deepwater spill could have second-order environmental impacts that could be cumulatively worse than the spill itself, both for the Gulf and for other environmental arenas.

President Obama's decision to issue a blanket moratorium on deepwater oil drilling, inaccurately claiming the policy was recommended by scientists, underscores his fundamental misunderstanding of the role of science in policymaking.

In the aftermath of the Gulf oil spill, the best way to ensure that resources will be available for environmental restoration and economic revitalization work far in the future would be keeping BP viable under its current ownership.