Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
(Toggle Right Side Navigation)

Song Parodies -> "BP (It's Not Your Fault -- *REALLY*)"

Original Song Title:

"Born Free"

Original Performer:

Matt Monro / Andy Williams

Parody Song Title:

"BP (It's Not Your Fault -- *REALLY*)"

Parody Written by:

Tommy Turtle

The Lyrics

Had to break hiatus, because the amount of slime pouring out of holier-than-thou Congresspersons, POTUS, and press far exceeds the amount pouring out of the well. ... The Texas Congressman who apologized to BP for their mistreatment by the Government was 100% correct to do so.

You're liable? They capped you [1]
Obama bum-rapped you
A price illegal and steep

You want to drill shallow
The Feds don't allow, no!
They say, you gotta go deep [2]

Though they've all decried you
That depth, fix has ne'er been tried [3]
Press takes you for a ride

Stop a-pol-o-gizing
And us, realizing:
Gov: All tar(p)-balls! [4]

[1] A long time ago, in an effort to encourage "energy independence" by increasing drilling in the US to reduce dependence on foreign oil, etc., a bill was passed by a bipartisan Congress and POTUS, "capping" (ouch) the liability of an oil driller at $75 million for any one incident. Whether the oil companies supported such measure or played no part in it is irrelevant -- the US wanted "evergy independence", and only Congress can pass laws, and only the POTUS can sign them into effect, or be overridden by a super-majority in Congress.

Therefore, it was patently illegal for Obama to break our own laws, passed by our own politicians, and indeed, "shake down" BP for $20 billion, so he could look like he'd "kicked someone's ass" (his own words), rather than blame himself for the fact that *several nations and foreign oil companies* offered assistance in the form of ships, equipment, etc. immediately after the spill, but Mr. Messiah turned them down, sayiing that we* could take care of it ourselves, and if we couldn't, he'd go down there 58 days later and use his oratorical skills to convince the well that "Yes, You Can Cap Yourself" -- "Change If We Believe In It".

btw, the same pattern occurred in the nuclear power plant industry. But that's another story - or parody.

2) BP had first asked the State of Louisiana for a permit to drill a well in that State's coastal waters, at a depth of only *500* (five hundred) feet, (~150m), a depth at which there is much experience in drilling, maintenance, and repair. The State said OK.

Enter The Dragon** - the Federal Government, which, without any legal authority whatsoever (other than being the biggest kid on the block), overrode Louisiana's permit, asserted their authority over US coastal waters beyond the State limit, and forbade BP to drill on the Continental Shelf (the shallow ocean bottom that slopes down from most of the US coastline for a while, before dropping off like a cliff into the deep blue).

Why? Because if there were an accident, a well that close to shore might foul the beaches!
(waits for raucus laughter to die down.)

[3] So, you (BP) must drill much farther offshore, off the Continental Shelf, in water *5,000* (five thousand) feet (~1,500m) deep -- a depth at which there is no experience in the kind of major repair here, and very little, if any, experience, period.

Good thinking! Now, instead of a leak fouling only Louisiana's beaches, it can foul Florida's, Cuba's, Georgia's, Newfoundland's, England's, France's .....

Note that professional divers can easily go to the 500-foot depth level and perform welding and other underwater repairs, so any leak could have been fixed permanently in a matter of hours or days. However, no human can go to 5,000' except inside a bathyscape (small ultra-depth submarine), which isn't capable of doing repairs.

[4] Since "tar balls" has been punned upon endlessly in the mass-mediaocrity, threw in a little shot at TARP, the Big Bailout Plan. Hey, this doesn't make sense. AIG, Goldman Sachs, etc., show years of incomepetence, and, in some cases, deliberate and possibly criminal malice, and they get bailed out by the taxpayers. BP, very much wanting to gain honestly the oil under the Gulf, has an accident, and suddenly they're being crucified.... Go ahead, 'splain why the two situations are different. The economic fallout from the former is far worse than from the latter.
(Yes, the environmental fallout from this is worse. Doesn't change the question.)

In the meantime, Congress and POTUS continue to pass laws without thinking about the consequences, and, for that matter, lacking the knowlegdge even to predict the consequences. Any econoturtle could have told them the eventual result of liability-capping, and it just gets easier (and stupider) from there.

Who but TT would Tell The TruTh, unpopular though it be?

btw, I agree that BP is not without blame, but the point is that they were *forced* into this situation by the Feds. Yeah, they could've Just Said No -- No, thank you, Sirs, we do not care to drill there -- but they need the oil for their business and their stockholders, we need it for (halo light) Energy Independence (chorus of cherubs doing "Hallelujah"), and, of course, they were mislead into believing that their max liability would be only 75 mil. .... Which *may* have induced them to be a bit less careful than if their liability were unlimited, as it should have been, and a mistake could cost 20 or 50 billion.

It's all about the incentives, and the Feds set up the wrong incentives, as they usually do, though they don't realize it, because they have some other goal in mind. Unfortunately, reality always wins in the end.

And Fed policies foul TT's habiTaT.

* "What's this "we" stuff, White Man?" -- old Tonto-Lone Ranger joke.

** Movie that made Bruce Lee famous.

OS lyrics by Don Black and music by John Barry. (naah, not that one - JAB fooled TT once, shame on him... ) .... Never heard of Matt Monro, British singer who recorded the song for the movie; many covers, though it looks like Willams' charted best, and probably most associated with it.

© 2010 Tommy Turtle. All rights reserved. E-mail:

Your Vote & Comment Counts

The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.

Place Your Vote

Matches Pace of
Original Song: 
How Funny: 
Overall Score: 

In order for your vote to count, you need to hit the 'Place Your Vote' button.

Voting Results

Pacing: 4.7
How Funny: 4.7
Overall Rating: 4.8

Total Votes: 16

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

    Pacing How Funny Overall Rating
 1   1
 2   0
 3   0
 4   1
 5   14

User Comments

Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.

seweweno - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
thanks for the commentary - and an AMEN from the EWE and another open can of worms for you!
Patrick - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Welcome back! We've missed you. A Brazilian friend of mine says the US government is subsidizing oil companies to drill in even deeper water off the coast of Brazil. Have you heard the theory that oil is actually a continually generated product of catalytic processes within the earth's core, not merely the remnants of long-departed dinosaurs. Seems more logical to me. How did all those dinos manage to expire 10,000 feet under water off the coast of Brazil? Your analysis of the perverse incentives created by government is something everyone should read. Seems however that nobody is reading this site much anymore. The number of submissions is down. And they're mostly parodies of newer songs I've never heard of. My last song has no votes or comments. I was at least expecting Michael to call me a Palinjugend or Stosstrupp. Nada! We need your insights and your creativity again.
McKludge - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
"How did all those dinos manage to expire 10,000 feet under water off the coast of Brazil? " It's called Plate Tectonics, Patrick. Back in the Mesozoic era (when the dinosaurs lived), there was a huge land mass - that became South America and Africa - in the area that is now "off the coast of Brazil." The earth's plates have moved quite a lot in the past 200 million years, and carried a lot of stuff with them.

I know that this might set you off, TT, but: "Whether the oil companies supported such measure or played no part in it is irrelevant." Given the power that - I am sure you know - the oil company lobbies have in our Congress, that's a pretty naive thing to say. We may want all our Congressmen to be free of influence, but reality dictates otherwise.
TJC - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
To paraphrase the Borg, "Resistance to TT is futoil!" Funny, but I find my initial outrage at TT's contr'oil'verse'ial POV effectively 'blind ram sheered' (*he*, of course, will substitute 'ewe') by the blowout preinventiveness of the Cogent Chelonian's crude logic n' relentlessly slick footnotery. Truly the government has failed more egregiously than the essentially unregulated company they're demonizing to obfuscate the root cause of this 'scheckleogical' disaster.
Warren Baker - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Welcome back, TT. Missed your banter!
IMHO, if the Feds said, go drill in deeper waters, that company should have some type of plan to fix a catastrophic failure. BP didn't. It's kind of like saying you can build your house any where but here, but then the builder builds his house somewhere else, but takes no responsibility on how he builds that house.
And I must agree with McKludge in that the infinitely corruptable representatives lend their votes to whoever greases their palms.
Also, though Obama strong armed, I don't believe he passed legislation saying BP must create this fund. Public pressure pushed that button, and BP would have faced a huge backlash from gas enthusiasts (for lack of a better term). Though the law may say caps exist (which is really absurd), there's no law saying a company can exceed that cap if the situation warrants a larger action.
We'll disagree on this point, kind sir, but your words are always welcome! Hope to see more of TT style in the near future.
Fiddlegirl - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Hey, TT-- scootch over a bit, and I'll join you out on your limb.

Point well taken. Joe Barton's comment, however undiplomatic, was in fact correct in terms of arguing for "due process". There are already laws in place to ensure that BP will be held for damages, and the company has said it would comply. So President Obama's "ass-kicking" amounts to little more than the government taking property from one party and passing it to another, with no pre-existing law or Constitutional authority to do so whatsoever. In any other circle or context, I think that would be termed "thuggery"...

To paraphrase the commercial-- Environmental and legal costs of spill: incalculable. Opportunity for political grandstanding: Priceless.
LadyTaTa - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
SeniorTata, great write, sirT, The Duke oTarBall .
Mark Scotti - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
That was really 'slick'!!! Welcome back, TT...
AFW - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Good Turtle biting satire..good to see you poppin' your head out of the shell, again
John Barry - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Can't agree--e.g, Joe Barton is a petro-prostitute. My sentiments aside, though, 5s for the parody.
Old Man Ribber - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
At least one Turtle was not harmed by the oil spill! ;D
Guy - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
I broike my hiatus as well today and man is it sore. I just had to plant a BP bash, one of the best things for a sore hiatus. I'd welcome you back but I've been gone myself and didn't know that you were as well.

And just when you thought eels couldn't get more slippery. Fine write and fine commentary. I'm keeping my political views on this matter regimented to parody form, that is until someone really pisses me off.
Christie Marie M - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Hey, welcome back, friend! How've you been? As AFW said, nice of you to be out of your shell! Wow, whoever thought that it was the Feds who put BP up to drilling the well (from what I've read from Footnote 4, paragraph 4?!) In addition, when you mentioned that BP should say no to Feds, I can hear them now: "No thanks you, Feds! Drilling is a dangerous consequence and serious offense!" But instead they thought: "Ah, screw the consequences, we need the oil for our business and we could make a decent fortune!" Couldn't resist that! Well, TT, it's nice to see you writing again. We on behalf of AIR missed you lots! Here's some slippery 5's!
Tommy Turtle, Vol. I - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
seweweno: Thank EWE! ;)

Patrick: It's nice to be missed, but I too had noticed the audience decline, one of the reasons for loss of motivation to post (other was sheer burnout and a much-needed break.) ... Hadn't heard that theory. McKludge explains well, but there's no reason why things shouldn't still be decaying underground, so perhaps more oil is indeed being generated. ... Very kind words, though I doubt that TT (& partner) were carrying the site by themselves. ;) ... Will drop one or tewe in as the urge strikes. Thanks again for v/c.

McKludge: Doesn't set me off. Just that only Congress has the power, and they also have the power to Just Say No to lobbyists' bribes. I refuse to accept that although any entity might be guilty of undue influence, the officeholder who accepts it isn't equally guilty -- often more so, because they may have extorted the bribe to give some permit or whatever that in fairness, the entity deserved in the first place. Nor that we have to live with a reality of corruption. Best bet: Take away Congress' power, restrict it to only what's in the Constitution (what a concept!), and then they have far less influence to peddle. ... Would *you* take the bribe? I wouldn't. Why should we hold Congress to a lower standard? Thanks for v/c.
          btw, McK, how do oil company lobbyists account for Obama's refusal of rapid assistance from other nations and oil companies?

TJC: Also demonizing BP to distract public attention -- quite successfully -- from Congress and the POTUS' own failures to accomplish anything worthwhile, not to mention their own misdeeds. Thanks for v/c.

Warren Baker: Back atcha! ... 1) They didn't say "you can build your house anywhere but here". They said, "you can't drill in the shallow waters of the Continental Shelf at all: you must go off the shelf." That is not a smooth transition. The turtle has dived off the reefs of Little Cayman Island (south of Cuba), where the reef ends in a little as 18' of water, then a sheer cliff plunging to 6,000 feet. So there was no "in between".
          2) *Everyone* agrees (I hope) with McKludge that Congress is bunch of cheap whores. That doesn't make it right.
          3) BP had already said that they would pay for the cleanup, and, IIRC, for economic damages, but if they didn't say or do that, anyone injured has recourse to the Courts. I'm sure that in the face of thousands of lawsuits (the fishermen etc.), or a class-action suit, BP would willingly settle. The difference is that either BP could come to terms with the injured party, or, if unable or unwilling, a Judge (and probably a jury) would look at the evidence and determine if the party had suffered, and if so, what was fair recompense.
          Instead, we now have that $20 billion under control of the GOVERNMENT, and since we all agree that the pols are corrupt, don't you think that their friends, campaign contributors, and voters in each's home state will get the money arbitrarily, rather than through, as Patrick said, due process of law? Why would these "infinitely corruptible" (your words) people handle this slush fund any more honestly than they handle anything else?
          5) Of course the caps are absurd. And of course anyone can voluntarily do more good than the law requires. Or be required to compensate the injured, as above. But a bipartisan Congress and POTUS passed the cap, and indeed, Obama strong-armed BP, rather than allow the company a chance to show good faith, or for the judiciary, not the elected officials, to determine who got what.
          Me? I believe that laws mean what they say, and if we don't mean them, then we shouldn't pass them. And that we should hold responsible (by voting out of office) those who pass stupid laws. Thanks for v/c.

Tommy Turtle, Vol. II - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Fiddlegirl: For some reason, at first glance I read your comment as "Scotch over a little bit...." Freudian slip on my part, no doubt. What kind of slip do you have on? ... Astute as ever on the "thuggery", though I believe the formal term is "armed robbery". (Don't agree? Try not obeying. I assure you that people with guns will point them at you and force you to obey.)
          "the government taking property from one party and passing it to another,..." That's pretty much all they ever do, and have been doing, since about 1913, when the Federal Reserve was established and Gov interference grew exponentially. Actually, there's a parody about it ... oh, wait, you co-authored it. My bad. ;)
          Value of FG's analysis: incalculable. End of the comment: Priceless. xoxoxo muah!

Lady TaTa (or TarTar, LOL): Just the title I've always wanted! How did you know? :) .. thanks for v/c.

Mark Scotti: LOL! Thanks for v/c, and nice ta see ya again, too!

AFW: Couldn't keep the head in the shell any longer in the face of all the scapegoating, much as John Edwards can't keep the head in the pants.... thanks for v/c.

John Barry: Probably, but remember the fallacy of "ad hominem". If his statement is correct, which I believe it is, then his motivation for it is irrelevant. Statements stand on their truth or falsity, not on who said them or why. Thanks for the impartial vote.

Old Man Ribber: Not yet, anyway... probably thanks to the Loop Current. Thanks for v/c.

Guy: It *is* a coincidence, isn't it? (theme from "Outer Limits" plays) My motivation was the over-abundance of BP-bashing, with no one telling "the rest of the story", i. e. the events and context that led to the disaster. Thanks for v/c.

Christie Marie M: Back atcha, too, friend! ... I said that BP "could" have said no, not that they "should" have. Indeed, all we hear about is America's need for energy independence, and that $75 million cap was in place -- or so they thought..... Without it, they might have taken the consequences more seriously. As said in the concluding footnotes, it's all about what incentives and disincentives are put into place, and the Feds hold all the cards in that aspect. Thanks for the (greasy or otherwise) v/c!
John Jenkins - June 22, 2010 - Report this comment
Well, BP does deserve some blame, but great job of pointing out where much of the blame (that the mainstream media seems to have overlooked – surprise) belongs. I like the comment about restricting Congress to activities defined in the Constitution. Surprised that the above comments do not mention ANWR, where accidents would cause little harm and be easy to repair.
Tommy Turtle - June 23, 2010 - Report this comment
John Jenkins: Well, (haha), they've been arguing about ANWR since 1977, and it will probably remain a political football for the foreseeable future. We want to reduce dependence on the Middle East, but don't want to drill anywhere in the US -- go figure.

Until solar and wind power achieve cost-effectiveness, IMHO nuclear power, which is politically dead in the US (but supplies 80% of France's electricity) could reduce dependence on oil altogether, while producing zero emissions, zero "greenhouse gases", or to use the current buzzword, zero "carbon footprint". My supplier, Turtle Power & Light, built all of its nuke plants under budget and ahead of schedule; they've been certified to continue to run beyond their original design lifetimes, and they've never had a lost-time nuclear-related worker injury (as opposed to, say, a worker tripping in the parking lot.).

But thanks to Hanoi Jane and her ilk, it's a dirty word --you can't even bring it up. (Fact: More people have been killed in Teddy Kennedy's car than in US nuke plants.) Thanks for stopping by and for v/c.
Andy Primus - June 25, 2010 - Report this comment
Very informative. Didn't know about the politics behind it (not surprising, being from the UK). Saw a good TV doc about this last night. As microorganisms break down the oil, all of the oxygen in the water gets used up. You end up with mile upon mile of dead zone where everything has died. Another interesting bit was about the oyster fishermen. A lot of them are now unemployed because their fishing grounds have been closed. I hope there is some sort of fund for them and anyone else who ends up out of pocket.
Tommy Turtle - June 25, 2010 - Report this comment
Andy Primus: Thanks for stopping by. Hope you get a chance to read today's post (Friday, US Chucky date) about the abysmal failure of the US Govt agency that was *supposed* to exercise oversight from the beginning (permit application), with regular inspections to ensure compliance. They were bought off with sex and drugs. So BP may be slime, but the Gov dropped the ball, in exchange for a ball :-), and let them get away with it. Seems the Gov should bear as much or more of the compensation to victims as BP, no?

Thanks for v/c -- and nice to see you again!
Just Fartin' Away - June 30, 2010 - Report this comment
What a gassy one! Whoo! 5's
Tommy Turtle - June 30, 2010 - Report this comment
Just Fartin' Away: Thanks for vote and comment (no thanks for the gas, though, unless you can bottle it for fuel.)

The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.

Link To This Page

The address of this page is: For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.

This is view # 1377