I watched CBS’s news show last night with Katie Couric so you don’t have to. They spent quite a lot of time marveling at how clean the beaches were and how the skimmer boats had practically nothing to pick up. Showed graphics on how massive oil spill had now shrunk to seemingly insignificant size. Guess the crisis is over. If you can’t trust Katie who in this world can you trust?
“WASHINGTON (AFP) – With BP’s broken well in the Gulf of Mexico finally capped, the focus shifts to the surface clean-up and the question on everyone’s lips is: where is all the oil?”
NEW ORLEANS (Mother Jones) – I don’t know who the fuck these everyones are, but I’m happy to help out them, and ABC, and this AFP reporter writing that due to BP’s stunningly successful skimming and burning efforts, “the real difficulty now is finding any oil to clean up.”
I sent one text message to Bloomberg’s Lizzie O’Leary, who’s standing on Grand Isle, Louisiana, right now, asking how the beach looks. “Lower part past the barrier untouched with globs of oil that washed up last night,” she said. By “untouched,” she means by cleanup crews, and that “barrier” she’s talking about is the one the press isn’t allowed past.
[…]
I can’t even count the number of correspondents down here who’ve pointed out that digging a finger under the surface of supposedly clean sand turns up crude, or the number of cleanup workers who’ve said cleanup efforts are strictly cosmetic, or that no matter what they do the contamination just keeps bubbling up.It’s BP’s job to whitewash this story and make it easier to indulge the desire to forget about the scope of the devastation, guys. Not the media’s.
…and yet, in spite of all this overwhelming evidence otherwise, conservatives still think the mainstream media are liberal.
# 1 Greg Allen said, on July 29th, 2010 at 5:51 am
“…and yet, in spite of all this overwhelming evidence otherwise, conservatives still think the mainstream media are liberal.”
The conservative mindthink (i.e. mine) –> The mainstream media are trying to make their President Obama look good (or at least not as bad). Making BP look better is just a coincidence.
Thus the mainstream media are liberal, or at the very least Obama lackeys.
As for “where is the gigantic flood of the oil” — I’ve heard two explanations.
1) Dispersants. The oil is suspended in a billion trillion little globules possibly poisioning our whole food chain.
2) It’s sitting there. There is also a Oklahoma-sized oil slick but it hasn’t fully rammed the coast (yet). http://tinyurl.com/2ct7fls
.
#2: How exactly does this make Obama look good? He has done everything possible to push this all onto BP. The public still thinks The Prez did far too little too late in all this.
Although it shouldn’t anymore, it never ceases to amaze me how people on all sides are able to twist things to support their views.
Who cares if the media is liburl? The simple fact is that the 4th estate is no longer doing their jobs. They are owned, lock, stock and barrel by corporations.
Don’t we currently have about 10% of our population looking for a job? Doesn’t the coast need people to clean-up the spill? Perfect match.
….but I also like how *all* of the media is covering up obvious facts about the oil spill, but 1 writer from a very liberal leaning magazine who has 1 friend in Louisiana….well, that’s the gospel truth!
I guess we all search out the news that fits out own agendas, huh?
I don’t think they have to lie much because sheeple have short memories.
Look for dig dig dig tee shirts from the Repug’s and Teabaggers any moment now.
FIRST: Define Main Stream Media
SECOND: Understand everything you “know” about any issue comes from “some kind” of media.
THIRD: Everything falls on a continuum.
FOURTH: Find and support the sources that report what you think you want.
FIFTH: Buy an issue of Mother Jones.
PS–Main Stream Media not only is “owned by” large stodgy corporations, THEY ARE large stodgy corporations themselves.
PPS–Use this instance as your guide to understanding similar issues. If you have the government/media/business telling you that everything is honky dory after millions of gallons of crude is pumped into the Gulf, what do you think they are doing with all their other responsibilities?
The general rule is not to try and separate lies from the truth, but to separate one lie from another. You gotta find slivers of truth and add them up. Or just read Mother Jones? Ha, ha.
Uncle Dave needs to look at the facts and understand a bit about science. The Gulf of Mexico is huge. The surface area is over 500,000 square miles. Any idea how much water is needed to fill it, especially when parts of it are almost 2 miles deep?
The total effect of this oil leak is like one one-millionth of an ounce of oil in a bathtub of water.
Throw in a few hurricanes over the next couple months and the oil spill will be history.
One additional tidbit:
During the first Gulf War in Kuwait (1990), 10 times as much oil spilled into the Persian Gulf, which is one-sixth the size of the Gulf of Mexico.
What were the consequences? A 1993 UNESCO study reported “little” long-term damage was done to the environment. Half the oil evaporated, a million barrels were recovered and 2 million to 3 million barrels washed ashore, mainly in Saudi Arabia.
JB==that is simply FASCINATING. I was getting all ready to call you a scumbag liar (gets old doesn’t it?) but then you actually back up your crapfest with “an example.” Not a link, but so much more than what you asshats do. Normally you just lie and assume enough people will buy into it. Imagine actually providing something that can be confirmed? Back to ConJob 101 for YOU!
So, I’ll go google (UNESCO “OIL SPILL” 1993) and see what gives. I have to admit, I’m expecting oil spills aren’t as bad as I do think, but won’t be surprised otherwise. Right off the bat, recalling the shoreline of the Red Sea: rock and sand. Not the worlds 3-4th largest estuary and one of two breeding grounds for Tuna and who knows what else?
But, we will see.
Well, that was easy. Seems whatever JB read, probably the NYTimes reporting word for word what JB posted?, is very much “just like” the Katie Couric piece above? Very much like Brietbart manufacturing a slimeball campaign of misinformation and having Faux Spews pick it up as legitimate?
For “further studies” showing the oil spill playing out as we all assume: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War_oil_spill
1) dispersants worked just like they were supposed to. thus why the govt tried to stop their use. No giant oil spill, no way to demonize and propagandize the situation
2) nature takes it’s course. microbes break down oil which is a naturally occurring thing in nature. Millions of barrels of oil leak naturally into the ocean from the earth constantly. there’s just no money to be made demonizing nature. Can’t use that as an excuse to raise taxes
Got to cover for Obama. It’s the media’s #1 job, as seen in the Journolist.
I’m curious to see if Maureen Dowd will write a column taking Obama to task for not knowing Snooki.
http://nytimes.com/2000/05/10/opinion/liberties-big-picture-little-picture.html
Bobbo #1
I have given up including links on this forum. Sometimes www. works, other times http:// works, and other times neither works.
So I figure the folks can do the same thing I do and google the details.
Yes, I have noticed that you like to call virtually everyone who disagrees with you a scumbag liar (and it does get old). Maybe you could come up with something new for a change.
jman–you don’t have to demonize a demon. You see==they are already demons. Typical Repug sludge. Nature/Chemistry/Physics works to the end that there is “nothing to worry about” and Nature/Chemistry/Physics of oil going into an estuary and onto the beach is irrelevant.
Good boy.
It’s a conspiracy. There never was an oil spill. THEY just want you to believe it. That’s why it doesn’t make sense!
#15–JB==well done. I wonder what gives. I have never had an issue posting a link. About half the time all I have to do is copy the link, paste it, remove the “www.” and its all good. Frusting as links really do move a subject along, and often I think provide a valuable “public” service.
I also agree with your criticism of my tendency. Too much of what you post is just as offense to me. You however are immune to “facts” so the only way to communicate the offensiveness of your post is too add the spice I do. Rather dry and witless to think/write one thing and then to CENSOR it for polite society?
But I get your point. Pro’s and Con’s to all we do. I do disagree with a few people and respect and honor their contributions/effort. You can choose my response by the content you post.
Overall:
Irrelevant – no
Minor – yes
#13
The dispersants are hiding the problem, not fixing it.
Bobbo, the bubblehead – “submit a balanced argument”? WTF – talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Or will you say that is racist?
OK, let’s try one of your favorite lib rags – Time Magazine. Even they are admitting it and agreeing with Rush Limbaugh. Both sides see what you are blind to.
http://time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2007202,00.html
Headline: The BP Spill: Has the Damage Been Exaggerated?
Hey Bubbo, hope you enjoy eating that crow, now.
Marshes and wetlands that have absorbed oil can’t be easily cleaned without doing more damage than they have already suffered. So those are off the to do list.
Floating light oil evaporates or is bio-ingested over time, so the large mattes of oil are dispersing. Off the to do list.
Booms are controlling much of the stubborn floaty stuff, so that portion is off the to do list.
Beachcombing has removed much of that off the to do list. Sure subsurface oil needs to be cleaned up, but much of that will be bio-ingested over time, too. Bacteria happen to like dining on light crude, in the dark, however slowly they go about it.
Now Mother Jones is bitching about how few things there are on the to do list.
Is she right, or is she just a bitch, slapping a story together?
Shouldn’t we go back to flaming about how the Obama Administration is doing such a poor job by not bombing BP into the 15th century, the way the Republicans would have traditionally “solved” it?
#22–JB==I contest I am a pot, but we both agree you are the kettle. Of course not all my positions are balanced. I don’t want to give more money to the already super rich, or anonymity to terrorists, or cover to our broken political system. Not all subjects are “balanced.” Too many are simply corrupt/evil and need to be called out for it.
A far different pot than calling a massive oil spill “no big deal.” So you hunt and search for any “thing” that will support your big oil position. NYTimes from years ago is bogus so now you move to a recent Times article on certain items are exaggerated? What does THAT mean to you? Nothing to worry about?
The “news” is nothing but the first draft erroneous writing of history. The Disaster in the Gulf will become reliably detailed after the news crews leave the area and the experts get down to it.
Why do YOU want to diminish the import of the degradation to our environment because of this oil spill? Do you have a vested interest or just want to support your masters?
Are you for a fresh look at oil drilling safety standards or do you want to go forward with no changes at all?
Does reality inform your viewpoint?
What is the “main stream media”? Is that the thing Sarah, Rush and Fox always bitch about? Let’s see, Rush Limbaugh is the #1 radio show (talk/political). Fox News is the #1 cable news (talk/political). The Wall Street journal is the #1 business/news paper (owned by guy who owns Fox News). The conservatives are the media, yet always bitching about the “main stream” media.
How can you crow about being #1, then in the next sentence act as if you’re some underdog victim, just a voice crying out in the wilderness. If ONLY someone would listen to the Republicans, if ONLY they had a voice and someone would listen to all their ideas on how to fix America! You know…if only they had just RUN the country for the last 8 years, and had most of the media outlets (except NPR).
LOL
#22–JB==thats an interesting/good article you linked to:
http://time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2007202,00.html
I think I have read reports on large numbers of dead birds and dolphins at sea. The effect on the tuna population is still unknown. Why limit the exaggeration to “mammals” when the ocean has so many more fish? I saw dozens of turtles being rescued.
But yea==when there is a massive response to minimize the damage, there will be less damage than initially warned against if nothing is done?
Things can/will always be better or worse than initially thought/reported.
I wonder what you do think of as important or relevant beyond your coupons and dividends.
#8 Bobbo,
Mainstream media means the TV networks and big newspapers. Fox News and WSJ are both mainstream and are obvious exceptions, but the rest have been pro-democrat, anti-republican for decades. Media that is not mainstream would be anything that is targeted to a particular audience and does not have mass appeal. Podcasts, blogs, and talk shows currently all fall into this catagory. Any of these formats could be considered mainstream if a show got big enough, (Oprah maybe?), but that is generally not the case.
#1 Greg Allen,
How is this even up for debate after the JournoList scandal?
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072206024.html
How anyone can honestly not admit this is not the case as of 2007 since this evidence has come forward? Besides, what else would you expect the 60s throwback professors who control most journalist schools to produce? How many liberal arts students did you know in school who had an opinion contrary to what they were being indoctrinated with? (Thankfully you learn to think for yourself in engineering schools.)
Look at the softball coverage this administration has received compared to that of the previous administration. Did you see anyone quizzing Obama on how many foreign leader names he know? Have you ever seen anyone ask him a tough question?
Want more proof?
http://sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/pdfs/MediaBias.pdf
Got a link to a contradicting study? And “I read an post on a liberal blog once saying this study has been refuted” doesn’t count.
Bubbo – your true colors are starting to show. You love employees, and you hate employers.
When you get boxed into a corner, you try to twist the argument away from your weak position by asking:
Why do YOU want to diminish the import of the degradation to our environment because of this oil spill? Do you have a vested interest or just want to support your masters?
Why? Because Obama’s moratorium has effectively destroyed the USA oil drilling industry and terminated the jobs of thousands of workers. The uncertainty caused by Obama’s policies on the future of USA-based oil drilling will cause the petroleum companies to seek safer locations away from the USA.
Plus his classic knee-jerk reaction will have major ramifications to all of us who rely on petroleum for our daily lives – nylon, perfume, transportation, plastics, etc. If you can’t see that, then there is nothing I can say that will convince you.
It was terrible that 11 people lost their lives on the rig. But do Presidents shut down all Boeing 747’s flights for 6 months to investigate a plan crash when hundreds of people die? Of course not.
Yes, I do have a vested interest – an interest in the success of America. And with Obama killing the USA oil industry, our masters will be wearing robes and towels.
#8 Bobbo,
Mainstream media means the TV networks and big newspapers. Fox News and WSJ are both mainstream and are obvious exceptions, but the rest have been pro-democrat, anti-republican for decades. Media that is not mainstream would be anything that is targeted to a particular audience and does not have mass appeal. Podcasts, blogs, and talk shows currently all fall into this catagory. Any of these formats could be considered mainstream if a show got big enough, (Oprah maybe?), but that is generally not the case.
#1 Greg Allen,
How is this even up for debate after the JournoList scandal?
http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072206024.html
How anyone can honestly not admit this is not the case as of 2007 since this evidence has come forward? Besides, what else would you expect the 60s throwback professors who control most journalist schools to produce? How many liberal arts students did you know in school who had an opinion contrary to what they were being indoctrinated with? (Thankfully you learn to think for yourself in engineering schools.)
Look at the softball coverage this administration has received compared to that of the previous administration. Did you see anyone quizzing Obama on how many foreign leader names he know? Have you ever seen anyone ask him a tough question?
Want more proof?
http://sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/pdfs/MediaBias.pdf
Got a link to a contradicting study? And “I read an post on a liberal blog once saying this study has been refuted” doesn’t count.
JB==thats more words/thoughts on a subject than I have ever seen you post. Still talking points, but with supporting argumentation rather than bumper sticker dogma alone. Since so many of your fellow retards have the same opinion, lets take a closer look:
1===Bubbo – your true colors are starting to show. You love employees, and you hate employers. /// Love and Hate? No, more pragmatic about both. Both are required, so the needs of both need attention. Silly/revealing to set them up as opposites.
2==When you get boxed into a corner, /// what corner? “Whispy fallacious memories, in the corners of YOUR MIND?” Ha, ha. Please state the corner you think exists.
3==you try to twist the argument away from your weak position by asking:
Why do YOU want to diminish the import of the degradation to our environment because of this oil spill? Do you have a vested interest or just want to support your masters?
Why? Because Obama’s moratorium has effectively destroyed the USA oil drilling industry and terminated the jobs of thousands of workers. The uncertainty caused by Obama’s policies on the future of USA-based oil drilling will cause the petroleum companies to seek safer locations away from the USA. //// Gee, doesn’t that have about ZERO to do with what you posted? ((everything does connect if you play it out long enough)). Outside the USA, deep oil drillers are required to drill TWO relief wells in case of a blow out. Why would these areas become more attractive if the USA imposes the very same requirement?
4==Plus his classic knee-jerk reaction will have major ramifications to all of us who rely on petroleum for our daily lives – nylon, perfume, transportation, plastics, etc. If you can’t see that, then there is nothing I can say that will convince you. ///Major ramification huh? That oil fields not yet developed that may contain less than 1% of world reserves when we import 70% of our oil? That kind of major impact? Ha, ha. What a mindless chicken little you are.
5==It was terrible that 11 people lost their lives on the rig. But do Presidents shut down all Boeing 747′s flights for 6 months to investigate a plan crash when hundreds of people die? Of course not. /// No, because an adequate inspection of ALL similar airplanes can be done in 2-3 days or a week AND THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME ROUTINELY!!! You really are a silly person to buy so completely into talking points designed for dolts like yourself.
6==Yes, I do have a vested interest – an interest in the success of America. And with Obama killing the USA oil industry, our masters will be wearing robes and towels. /// Or the needed/required/self evident/recommended switch to green energy will take place even faster all to our great benefit.
It is becoming clear: JB and his Ilk. Maybe not lying scumbags, just easily led. Poor babies. “I want everything to be like it was 50 years ago.” Well, good thing universal health care is coming. You should get good care in the home.
What? Are you saying that *gasp the mainstream media and “See BS” are LYING?
Why, I find that difficult to believe.
I mean why would they lie?
Oh, that’s right, they gotta help Obama and the Demogods out of another media mess…..