"What I tell you three times is true."
Will this depraved effort by BP, with the eager help of our despicable Honorable Public Figures and the always eager Media -nothing but a huge propaganda machine these days- actually work? Or rather, will enough people trust the ludicrous lies blaring from TV and magazines to make it seem almost believable to the general public that millions of gallons of oil, gas, and toxic chemical dispersants did little harm? Enough persons to purposefully taint the jury pool when the thousands of lawsuits against BP go to trial? Or will they succeed in bribing/threatening enough people to take the money and keep quiet, as was done for the 9/11 survivors?
I think the people who want to be convinced will happily believe what they're told, and that's a lot of people. McArdle would be a lot less indifferent if the spill happened where she lived.
Insty cited that article, too. The major highlights: The spill hasn't killed that many birds, and it hasn't destroyed as much of the wetlands as other major polluters. That's...that's great, guys.
"McArdle would be a lot less indifferent if the spill happened where she lived."I think it would have to hit even closer to home than that for her to give a crap. I think if an oil spill killed her pet bird, then she would be outraged.
It won't be too long until they start with, "If people were really concerned about the spill, they would stop buying gas at BP. Since BP is still selling gas, this is proof that the spill is not a big problem. Thus saith The Market."I wonder if Megan will be the first to make that argument or if somebody will beat her to it?
atat, it would have to be her pet bird that is of a rare and expensive species (about whose care and feeding she is entirely ignorant).
blivet and atat,I think Per Suderman is oil resistant
She posted this yesterday? Today I read that the estimates are nearly 5 million barrels, the largest marine spill ever by a long shot. Does she have great timing or what?LC, if she makes your argument, it'll be the day before they switch the name of the franchises to Amoco and revise the drop in sales to >50% from the currently reported 40%.
Shorter Megan:Scientists working for BP report that the spill is not nearly as bad as initially feared. As you all know, I am very skeptical of scientists and their liberal bias, but in this instance I am sure they are correct. After all, why would BP lie about the size of their oil spill liability knowing that the market would punish them for it in the distant future?In other news, the Federal government announced today that the BP oil spill is ten times larger than initial estimates. That is probably not relevant to this blog post.
I am forced to repeat a cliche since it says it best--fact have a well-known liberal bias, so they can be utterly discounted by the elite, who know in their gut that the facts are wrong.
Post a Comment