To Republican's: You can't have it both ways (unless you concede that your arguments make no sense)

"By limiting oil company liability, we effectively provided oil companies with enormous amounts of free insurance, allowing them to play with house money-that is, with public money." (http://bigthink.com/ideas/20575)
But yet in the health insurance debate, the R's argue personal responsibility, which is if people don't bother to insure themselves adequately enough against health care emergencies than the individual should pay the costs associated with such negligence. But it doesn't apply when talking about oil spills?
Let's say that I tell you that you can risk your entire savings on a risky investment AND that if your investment were to fail to pay off for you I'll cover any loss. What would you do? You'd find the highest potential payoff you could! And the potential downside would not matter! That's the logic the R's are using when they defend BP and apologize to BP for those who attempt to make them (BP etc) accountable for their negligence.
Let me try to synopsize my frustration (anger?): The R's claim to be big on self responsibility, individual merit, socialism = bad and the American Way = good (but they get to define what the "American Way" is). Why doesn't this extend to corporate governance? This seems to me an irreconcilable conflict in their dogma.
Here's an idea: They (the R's) could just admit that they are beholden to the big corporations to such an extent that they will mold their ideology to match whatever "logic" is presented to them by their corporate brethren.