Re: Number 4

If a corporation believes there is virtually no chance of something like this happening,

Of course they know this sometimes happens. They are not stupid, and drilling is what they do, they know something about it. They didn't take better security measures because the cost of failure isn't too high: liabilities are limited; some heads will roll, the company survives. If they had full liability, they wouldn't have drilled dangerous wells or only after taking the necessary measures.

(Personally, I don't think they would have drilled. I think offshore drilling would be almost non-existent if not for limited liabilities)

The regulators were allowing BP to fill out the regulation forms themselves in pencil, then going over what BP wrote in with pen and signing it.

That is the company's fault, how?

That is entirely the bureaucrats fault. Imho.

A lot of that hands-off attitude

That is not hands-off attitude. That is, as you said, not doing its job.

the 'less gov't' philosophy that accompanied Bush's presidency.

I still don't get why so many people, left, right and center alike, insist that Bush was a "small government" president. In history, only FDR expanded government more than Bush (and we know what went on during FDR).

Wake up to the myth you people!