About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Right-wing harmony: BP escrow account is "a slush fund"

June 17, 2010 12:10 am ET — 17 Comments

Right-wing media figures have responded to the decision by BP and the Obama administration to establish an escrow account funded by BP to pay claims arising from the Gulf oil spill by calling the account a "slush fund." Conservative commentators have habitually labeled progressive initiatives "a slush fund."

Right-wing choir sings: BP escrow account is "a slush fund"

Limbaugh: "[T]his is going to be used as a little miniature slush fund." On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh claimed, "When we last heard from the leader of the regime, he said that an independent, third-party person will be handling the $20 billion payout to people in the Gulf of Mexico." After noting that Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation Kenneth Feinberg would oversee the escrow fund, Limbaugh said, "The guy works for Obama, he's a czar, but somehow this thing is going to be sloughed off as some sort of independent agency he's going to head up? How stupid do they think we are, folks?" Limbaugh later added:

Look, the government's in charge of this. I want to know who's going to get it. Who's going to get this money? Union activists? ACORN people? Who's going to get this money? Let's keep a sharp eye on who Feinberg gives this money to, because I'm telling you, this is another bailout fund called something else, and we'll see who gets it. If Obama's past is prologue -- and it is -- then this is going to be used as a little miniature slush fund. [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 6/16/10]

Hannity and Varney are "going to call it a political slush fund." On Sean Hannity's Fox News show, Stuart Varney complained that Obama was "going to force BP to put, what, $20 billion into this fund." Varney subsequently said, "I'm going to call it a political slush fund." Hannity later added, "I agree with you on the slush fund." [Hannity, 6/15/10]

Oliver North: "This is a $20 billion slush fund." Discussing the escrow account on Hannity, Fox News contributor Oliver North stated, "This is a $20 billion slush fund. That's to start out. Second of all, we've had Eric Holder remind the American people as recently as just five days ago, they're not going to pay one dime for this." North went on to "predict" that "the federal government, having promised to do all of this, is going to have penitence coming to them literally for the rest of my lifetime asking them to pay up." [Hannity, 6/16/10]

Same old song: Media conservatives regularly attack progressive initiatives as slush funds

Beck: "Fannie Mae is a slush fund now" for "Crime Inc." On his syndicated radio show, Glenn Beck discussed his intricate conspiracy theory he calls "Crime Inc." and said, "Fannie Mae is a slush fund now. See, remember that was the problem with TARP. They said we don't want it to become a slush fund. Fannie Mae is. It is a slush fund for Crime Inc.'s progressive programs and agenda. Fannie Mae is the perfect place to stash money and all of the secrets." [The Glenn Beck Program, 5/14/10]  

Gasparino: Financial services liquidation fund is "a slush fund." Discussing financial regulatory reform on Hannity, Fox Business' Charles Gasparino cited a provision in the bill that would help pay for the liquidation of failing financial firms -- a provision conservatives falsely portrayed as a bailout fund. Gasparino said, "Well, I will say this that Wall Street, based on talking people in the executive suites, they are behind like 80 percent of this bill. The big thing they are behind is obviously the aspect of "Too Big to Fail." The fact that there is really a slush fund in here that if you get in trouble, there's 50 billion dollars to bail you out." [Hannity, 4/22/10]

Limbaugh: Shortage of rent vouchers in New York City proves stimulus was a "slush fund." Discussing reports that New York City housing officials might revoke rent assistance vouchers, Limbaugh asked, "Where did all this stimulus money go? Does this not prove, ladies and gentlemen, it wasn't a stimulus to anything. It's a slush fund." [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 4/7/10]

Beck: The stimulus is "a slush fund that the president can spend the money any way he wants." On his radio show, Beck stated, "Why is it you have almost three-quarters of the stimulus money still available, and you're going into other funds?" Beck hypothesized that stimulus money was being withheld to "expand" Obama's power and "do whatever it is he seems fit." Beck continued: "Don't worry, we now have a slush fund. We now have a slush fund that the president can spend the money any way he wants." [The Glenn Beck Program, 12/8/09]

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by ScienceBuff (June 17, 2010 8:01 am ET)
      2  
      Crazy Michele Bachmann has also adopted the "slush fund" terminology.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mari2jj (June 18, 2010 1:33 am ET)
           
        Yes Bachmann is disgusting but the real culprit is still Beck. One wonders if his religion's antiblack history as well as his own natural antipathy towards blacks pushes him into these ridiculous positions, even though those practices are no longer part of his Church. Or if he has some innate racism that compels him to badmouth Obama and even disparage Obama's family. He should have just held on to his non-apology apology. Also, Backmann is just a fruit cake and her stupid comments will have no bearing on anyone with even a small amount of brain power.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by mikelartist (June 17, 2010 8:07 am ET)
      2  
      It just goes to show the density of the majority of the wing nut talking heads. (most of them are drop outs - Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, Rove.... etc)
      They simply don't know what escrow means.

      I find it immensely amusing at the press conference that the wing nut reporters had to have the $20 billion dollar deal explained to them over and over in increasingly simple terms. They just didn't get it. It is worth a watch if there is a video.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by yankeefan19252745 (June 17, 2010 8:59 am ET)
      3 1
      Dear Sirs,
      Remember Nixon's "Checker's speech" about the slush fund of Howard Hughes?
      They are yelling about slush funds?
      The only convicted attorney general was Nixon's first, John Mitchell!
      They want to compare Eric Holder to him.
      Isn't that ba little like trying to get a character reference, from Al Capone, for Elliott Ness?
      Clifford Spencer
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (June 17, 2010 9:48 am ET)
      3  
      No, this is an escrow account with very specific legal limitations on how it is administered. No slush fund.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Andy Kreiss (June 17, 2010 10:23 am ET)
        2  
        The Republican congressmen are using the phrase too, while apologizing to BP execs. Submissive little corporate puppies.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by LagalLeft (June 17, 2010 10:50 am ET)
      1  
      While watching the hearings on C Span, I just heard Rep. Joe Barton R-Texas actually apologize to BP's Tony Hayward and called the 20
      billion dollar fund a ''shakedown'' by the Federal Government. I'm sure this will go over real well with the Gulf coast residents, which, apparently were McCain/Palin supporters in the election. Thanks, GOP. People are noticing how you defend BP. Thanks a lot. Dems really appreciate that. BTW, I live close to the coast and I know what people down here in New Oilands are saying.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by newzhound (June 17, 2010 11:49 am ET)
      4  
      Who else remembers the fund for the families of victims of 9/11?

      Was that a "slush fund?" 100% taxpayer money - American and United Airlines kicked in $0.

      It was an attempt to bail out those airlines and keep them from going BK by buying off the families and making them agree to not sue the airlines.

      Where were the right wing nutz then? Back in their shells?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by egb (June 17, 2010 3:37 pm ET)
          6
        When the CEO of BP has a private talk with the President and comes out offering up a $20B bucket of money for who knows who to control, that smells fishy to me. Think about that in any other context and you would be sure there was a bloody horse head under someone's covers. In some manner, the President has forced a private company to offer up $20B without any legislative or judicial support. This is an example of flaunting the Rule of Law -- something that President Obama promised he would not do when he became a member of the bar.

        No person should go to the White House without first requiring that all conversations be recorded and published. I recommend BP set up their own relief program and suffer at the hands of the legislature and judiciary and completely ignore the president. That way would at least people's problems and legal roblems (if BP is sincere) would be solved much quicker and more efficiently. If BP is not sincere, then expedited litigation would be applied and in all likelihood, BP will go bankrupt.

        BP has no motivation to drag their feet. Their stock price is down 50% and if they do nothing, they will go bankrupt. Those who think BP's chairman is a criminal are in the same mob that would destroy a local BP gas station, only afterwards learning it was locally owned.

        When the next congress convenes and the investigations start, I pray the gory details of that meeting between President Obama and CEO Hayward are exposed to public comment.

        It sure looks like extortion to me.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Unreality (June 18, 2010 12:56 am ET)
          3  
          EGB,

          So you want TAXPAYERS to pony up $20 billon for a problem caused by BP? You want TAXPAYERS to subsidize BP's disaster? You want TAXPAYERS to bail out BP?

          You expect BP to keep the profits and TAXPAYERS to pay the cleanup costs?

          How can my company get in on this kind of sweet deal? Do we have to spill 2 million barrels of oil?

          (ps: where did you get your talking points?)
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Unreality (June 18, 2010 1:03 am ET)
            2  
            One more thing, did you notice it was Day 57 before BP agreed to put an escrow account?

            If it was in BP's interest to set up their own relieve program WHY DIDN'T THEY?

            Why do you think BP didn't voluntarily form an escrow account on day 5, or 25, or 45? Why did it take a meeting with the President to take action?

            I don't want a penny of MY TAX MONEY GOING TO FIX BP'S FREAKING DISASTER! If you want to subsidize BP, tell us your bank account and we'll wire funds from it to BP tomorrow.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Jose4 (June 18, 2010 1:38 pm ET)
                 
              You will pay for it one way or the other, either in taxes or at the pump.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Unreality (June 19, 2010 1:27 pm ET)
                   
                Tell you what Jose, let BP try to get me at the pump. I've already stopped buying at ARCO and I can keep doing so.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by mikehuck1976 (June 17, 2010 12:35 pm ET)
      1  
      I think they are mixing this up with Hannity's freedom concerts.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by puttforever4682 (June 17, 2010 1:12 pm ET)
          3
        I have not been able to find out any further info about hannity's freedom concerts. Has there been any more credible evidence against him? Debbie Schluschel is just about the only source (questionable at best).
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Jose4 (June 18, 2010 11:29 am ET)
        1
      This is going to be cash for clunkers on steroids.

      I think this $20 billion shake down will help Obama temporarily but as soon as *victims* see they were getting better treatment under BP the move will back fire.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Unreality (June 19, 2010 1:45 pm ET)
           
        Jose, you've been listening to Rush and FauxNoise too much. There's no evidence in any word you wrote that you have either an original thought, nor comprehend the financial model for compensation, nor understand the concept of tort law.

        If we turned this around and suggested, "Obama wants taxpayers to pick up the tab for BP's spill," (a demonstrably false statement), Rush and FauxNoise would scream bloody murder that Obama was giving a payoff to his fat cat donors at BP in exchange for campaign contributions, and running up the national debt - correct?

        However, "Rush and the GOP want taxpayers to pick up the tab for BP's spill" is a demonstrably TRUE statement.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.