BP and the President

Today British Petroleum is asking for ideas about how to stop the massive oil leak a mile beneath the surface of the ocean and clean up the mess. It is difficult for me to believe tat a 240 billion dollar, multinational company has run out of methods for stopping a leak and cleaning up the damage they have done.
I have we come to a point in human society with the global economy where multinational corporations are in fact above the law, by which we individuals must adhere.
I don't think President Obama thinks so. I have been watching his activities with regard to the crises; my conclusions are in sharp contrast to many including many of my friends. I see image of a man who has made three trips to the region. Humble images of of a man talking to citizens not necessarily looking for a photo opportunity. I see images of a man who left aburbtly a week ago, when BP tried to put on a show with hundreds of workers on the beach who left the very day the President left. I see a President mobilizing our forces to contain and clean-up, while placing the responsibility ofr these things squarlily on he shoulders of the company. The images speak volumes. 240 billion dollars is larger than the budgets and GNPs of many countries. Certainly it is larger that he budgets of many of the government departments that over which President Obama presides.
So, how are we to interpret this contrast in styles between Tony Hayward in his fifties and presiding over a company with 240 billion dollars in profits, and President Obama who presides over several departments some of which have budgets exceeding that of BP. We see the President humble and purposeful, and Mr. Hayward , loud mouthed and making promises he can't delver on, but careful to avert responsibility, lest it cost him British Petroleum.
BP should be allowed to go under because not so much of the crises but their failure to take responsibility and clean up the mess and use enough of their 240 billion to stop and cleanup. They are irresponsible. This is not to blame chevron, Exxon, or any of the other multinational oil companies who do business in a profitable and yet responsible manner.
It is interesting how I was against letting companies like GM or AIG, while so many of my friends were crying that they should be allowed to go under, due to an economic crises that although they did not cause, that at least AIG actively participated in. So, what is the differences, so why should the government take BP and all of it's assets while bailing out or perhaps lending a helping hand to these other companies.
The answer is simple, there is a differences between crimes of money and profit and crimes of humanity. As they attempt to sidestep legal responsibility, by making careful public statement. Now of course they re asking for "ideas" from the public.
Corporate groups like BP are entities without control. They have become to larege to powerful and too arrogant to remain as they are.
Hopefully the President's strategy is the destruction of BP, they should be allowed to fail and persecuted for crimes against humanity.
Four states are now fouled by this unnatural disaster. Let the law suits begin. Let them continue till every cent of the 240 billion and all assets of BP are gone.