Comments on: “Not One Drop Of Oil Spilled”? Not Quite

Analysis: Advocates Repeat False Claim About Environmental Safety Of Offshore Drilling

[alphaa10-2009]

Correction to my last post--

Taxation is such painful political reality, Cheney went into full denial, and contradicted Bush''s own economist and Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O''Neil, saying, "Reagan proved deficits don''t matter."

[alphaa10-2009]

DemWatcher said, "AND they are planning to add MORE taxes to oil. Thank you, Dumbocrats!"
---

Speaking of incomprehension, you were asleep, perhaps as Bush shoveled more and more of his spending proposals upstairs into the national debt. Where was your voice of protest about the $3 trillion war in Iraq? That must be paid, too!

In fact, the national debt almost doubled on the Bush watch.

How do we pay down the national debt, class?

Johnny-- Quit electing Republicans?
Susie-- Stop spending on schools, healthcare and social security?
Newt-- Oh, I know! Raise taxes! (ooops)

Right you are, Newt! Taxation is such painful political reality, Cheney went into full denial, and contradicted Bush''s own economist and Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Kennedy, saying, "Reagan proved deficits don''t matter."

But deficits do matter, as conservatives for years have insisted they do. Only berserk neocons with bad aim go into denial about taxes because it is yet another Inconvenient Truth.

[alphaa10-2009]

How revealing that Faux News, Wall Street Journal and GOP-anchored pundits issued such blatant lies about drilling safety while Katrina is a recent memory. Perhaps they were told Bush had issued orders to dispose of all old news clips into a "memory hole", in Big Brother style?

Note the CBS article examines oil drilling arguments in the context of only Katrina-- one event-- to show the "clean drilling" talking point is a convenient untruth happily repeated by those with no interest in the truth.

The CBS examination, if widened further, would require an entire book to detail other spills, and how offshore drilling (and offshore oil transport) has a terrible, sordid record of environmental and personal hazards.

Santa Barbara was one of the more notable spills in recent decades, but by no means the only major spill.

Transporting crude from offshore activity carries hazards of its own-- remember the Exxon Valdez? This spill wiped out fishing in the affected area, and a federal court applied a large fine in recognition that a monster tanker carries an environmental hazard many times that of a cluster of oil rigs.

Heckuva job, Big Oil lobbyists! Caught in your web of lies, once again. With Big Oil, oil lobbies and their enabling prostitutes in congress, who needs criminals?

[jimfinster]

truthmatterz - you seem educated in this subject. How much actual environmental damage was realized as a result of these spills? And was any of it permanent?

Posted by erichsh



That is not the point of the story. Read it again!

[alphaa10-2009]

Excellent job, CBS. We readers can use more countering of untruth among the chattering classes.

But countering untruth requires acquaintance with the facts and sources. It requires an investment in reportage and investigation. Witness the Bush campaign to sell his war to the American public-- there was little effort at searching, probing criticism.

As a related example, CBS has none of its foreign correspondents on the ground in the Iraq or Afghanistan theaters. Are you waiting for the Bush press release? In 2003, you embedded reporters by the comparative truckload.

Today, Iraq and Afghanistan are as significant as ever, if not more so. Without such foreign correspondents as Kimberley Dozier and a dozen others just as professional, you will be caught napping, again.

[erichsh]

truthmatterz - you seem educated in this subject. How much actual environmental damage was realized as a result of these spills? And was any of it permanent?

[dnsallday]

As a result of both storms, a total volume of 17,652 barrels (or roughly three-quarters of a million gallons) of total petroleum products, of which 13,137 barrels were crude oil and condensate, was spilled from platforms, rigs and pipelines. 4,514 barrels were refined products from platforms and rigs.

There were 542 reports related to offshore pipelines that were damaged or displaced, of which 72 resulted in spills that had a volume of one barrel or more of crude oil or condensate. These pipelines were reported to be dented, kinked, pulled up, twisted or bent, pinhole or valve leaks or other damages.

The 72 pipeline spills were accountable for about 7,300 barrels of crude oil and condensate spilled into the Gulf.


However, MMS also noted that an estimated 8 million gallons (or 191,000 barrels) of oil was spilled from nine onshore facilities in the Louisiana Delta, where large holding tanks were breached by Katrina.

[dnsallday]

Don''t blame the Republicons. I''m sure it was an honest mistake. It would be hard for them to know that there were significant oil spills, after all they have had their hands over their eyes for the past 7 years.

[stick1770]

Hey aint...get your head out of your rear and maybe you could carry on a conversation. You are a lib moron, but it''s ok. The congress sat on their hands and did nothing for years. Now their solution is tax everyone and give it to them to dish out how they see fit after they take their cut. How about backing off and letting the markets and business handle it just like it''s working now. Price goes high, demand goes down, price goes down. Wow it''s actually working like it''s supposed to. What a miracle. Do you think that the dem''s plan of taxing people and oil companies will reduce costs? Adding more taxes will actually drive up the cost and once they get the money and budget that in, it will never go away. But throw out some more cursing, it shows your true IQ. Brilliant.

[erichsh]

ainttaken, are you as obnoxious, arrogant, and condescending in real life as you are in these posts? Whatever points you may try to make are completely drowned out in your vile tirade. The sad part is that your ilk personifies the far left blowhards.

[ivandrago]

To be fair the measurement of a drop is much bigger for a republican.

[cbsblogger]

Another lie to protect the corporate interests. It started with Ken Lay and Enron and then became a way of life for them.

[ubrew12]

edintex said: "[I] Did not see ANTYTHING spilled on the beaches. Must be "estimates" by the liberals in the mining and minerals based on reported ruptures."

Someone doing their job reports something you don''t like, so now they''re liberals? You don''t think they know better what they''re talking about than you? You went to the beach, and THAT''s your estimate of spillage? You want to be taken seriously?

Stick to fishing.

[edintex]

Funny thing though, I live on the Texas coast. Indded, I was out there on the water today. I was also able to view the coasts of Texas and Louisianna after the storms. Did not see ANTYTHING spilled on the beaches. Must be "estimates" by the liberals in the mining and minerals based on reported ruptures.

Today, I pulled up to a gas production rig in Galveston Bay and proceeded to catch several 24 inch plus trout with no effort. I wish there were more rigs closer to shore so I could wade out to them & catch nice fish WITHOUT a boat.

[demwatcher]

"And the Republican party is going extinct. It all works together, you know. I like it.

Posted by IRLiberal at 08:44 PM : Jul 19, 2008"

Interesting logic, considering that the Do-Nothing Democrat Congress has allowed gas prices to more than DOUBLE since they took control a year and a half ago. AND they are planning to add MORE taxes to oil. Thank you, Dumbocrats!

It doesn''t look like extinction for the Dems, more like MASS SUICIDE!

[demwatcher]

So in the context of fueling our mobility... then it can be said that "fossil fuels are for fossil thinking."

Posted by DaysRnumbrd at 08:41 PM : Jul 19, 2008

Read my post again, lamebrain. You people are the ones just putting oil in the context of ONLY FOR fuels. That is asinine because we DO NOT ONLY use petroleum for fuel.

The ORIGINAL post I quoted made the BROAD statement against fossil fuels.

If you want to just keep looking at just one facet of the picture, then your pigeon-hole view is worse than fossil thinking, it is idiotic, SHERLOCK.

[jmurrieta1]

Not to mention the Santa Barbara Channel blowout of a few years back.

Hence:

Ahnold to Bush: "Terminate this, moron!"

[irliberal]

So in the context of fueling our mobility... then it can be said that "fossil fuels are for fossil thinking."

And the Republican party is going extinct. It all works together, you know. I like it.

[daysrnumbrd]

Oil is NOT just used for fuel, dummies.

Posted by DemWatcher at 07:33 PM : Jul 19, 2008
...........

No ***** Sherlock!

But the amount of oil needed to produce various materials, such as plastics, is minimal compared to the amount needed to produce fuel for machines/engines.

Greatly reduce the need for oil to fuel our cars, planes, trains, and other machinery, then there would be plenty of U.S. oil production for the legacy machines that would still run on refined oil, as well as the other materials that are produced from oil.

So in the context of fueling our mobility... then it can be said that "fossil fuels are for fossil thinking."

[irliberal]

Posted by IRLiberal

Ubrew was just being sarcastic, he usually is on the side of common sense. There is no need to impugn his statement, the names are clearly stated in the article.

Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark., Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Sen. Trent Lott. R-Hell., Gov. Bobby Jindal, R-La., Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, and Nancy Pfotenhauer, an energy lobbyist and senior energy adviser to McCain.

What political party do all these liars belong to?

Posted by brianbwb at 02:15 PM

Ohh, sorry Ubrew. I didn''t realize you were being sarcastic. No smiley faces, no winks, no nothing. Just a reliance on the fact that I am supposed to recognize your name. Which I didn''t. 8-)

Everyone needs to be careful with the sarcasm. If they want to be taken seriously, they can''t be if they''re relying on name recognition of those who constantly post here (as opposed to those of us who do not).