Take the oil spill in 1969 off the California coast. Is the oil still there? Is the coastline uninhabitable? What about the 1979 Mexican government leak in the gulf? Ixtoc 1, 160 feet deep, owned by PeMex, gushed for 9 months, at least 3.5 million barrels. Mexico claimed sovereignty and did nothing. Texas beaches were coated. Are they still? How about the Exxon Valdez? Is that area still destroyed? Have not most of the species returned? In this short time span?
Posted by realetybytes on Tuesday, June 22, 2010 11:38:32 PMAnyone complaining about the oil spill should realize that the only reason the oil companies drill 5 miles off shore is due to the lies and propaganda of the fanatical environmentalists and their corrupt bought-and-paid for friends in the Congress. Environmentalists like to complain about what may happen 100 years from now, so no one can argue with them. They don’t like to look long term when it does not fit their radical agenda.
Take the oil spill in 1969 off the California coast. Is the oil still there? Is the coastline uninhabitable? What about the 1979 Mexican government leak in the gulf? Ixtoc 1, 160 feet deep, owned by PeMex, gushed for 9 months, at least 3.5 million barrels. Mexico claimed sovereignty and did nothing. Texas beaches were coated. Are they still? How about the Exxon Valdez? Is that area still destroyed? Have not most of the species returned? In this short time span?Oil is a natural product of the earth, and long-term, cleans itself up.The radical environmentalist green groups, where most of the communists, (Van Jones), went when the USSR collapsed, in their attempt to stifle progress and destroy American superiority, used alarmist propaganda to get the oil rich areas of the US declared off-limits to drilling.Shipping the oil in huge freighters and drilling at sea is much more dangerous to the environment then drilling on shore.Although there is no area they can point to, long term, and prove the destruction they claim occurs from drilling, we still have to go miles out to sea for the oil we need to secure our country’s security.Unfortunately, our country’s security is the last thing on the mind of the radical environmentalists and their progressive liberal friends in the Government.When we can get a license to hunt radical environmentalists until they are extinct, (or, at the very least, make them prove their lies, like global warming, with more then computer models that do not work unless they jimmie the numbers), this country will be safer.Long term, Robert Kennedy, Jr., (someone should tell him his father is dead, he can drop the “junior”…oh, wait, then he wouldn’t exist), is more dangerous to the United States superiority and survival then Bin Laden.Drill, Baby, Drill!This is a re-write on a previous article, “Environmentalists DID cause the gulf leak”
…but I just can’t! I fought this for a week or ten days, (since this occurred). I figured maybe it was just too easy, but I can’t do it anymore, I have to say it!
BILL CLINTON ACTUALY HAD THE STONES TO ATTACK SOMEONE FOR INFIDELITY! YES, THAT BILL CLINTON!
This disgusting piece of fecal matter actually put his name to a fund raising letter attacking Louisiana Senator Vitter, who was caught up in a sex scandal in the past, as an , “admitted sinner”.
This from a punk who drove the country through an impeachment hearing and lost his law license for lying under oath instead of being a man and admitting what everyone knew. His victim, whom he was ready to destroy as an unstable liar, proved what a piece of lying vermin Clinton was by keeping his semen on her stained dress and forcing a DNA test.
Lets see, what is worse? Someone who, when caught, stands up and admits his transgressions and asks for forgiveness, or someone that lies to the nations face repeatedly, lies in court and lies until his own DNA shows him to be a liar?
Bill Clinton is an unbelievable disgrace, and should be spat upon and shunned for what he did, and what he tried to do, (imagine what would have happened to Monica if she did not save the dress? Hillary and the rest of his enablers would have destroyed her).
The Clintons, the sewage of America.
The NY Times website, nytimes.com, carried an article today concerning the Supreme Court deciding it IS illegal for citizens to give material support to terrorist organizations. Finding it hard to believe who might doubt that, then remembering who is in the White House, I posted this comment:
Thank you, Supremes! Our First Amendment is neither a suicide pact nor a special dispensation for our citizens to help organizations that will destroy us or anyone else.
Unfortunately, this may open up prosecution of our president, who seems to have been offering material support to all of our, and most of the worlds, enemies.
Is Eric Holder paying attention? (He probably hasn’t read the Bill of Rights, either).
Some blogger on Politico posted Article 88, apparently covering insubordination, meeting the definition of General McChrystals statements concerning his Commander-in-Chief , (Obama), and Obamas’ advisors, (the clown, I mean Jim Jones, and everybodies favorite fool, Joe Biden). His implication was that McChrystal should be court-martialed. I posted this response:
The good General should show up at the White House, tender his resignation, and walk out, head held high.
I am tired of people apologizing for telling the truth.
Joe Wilson was right, Obama IS a liar.
Joe Barton was right, it WAS an embarrassing, illegal shakedown of a company already committed to following the law, putting 20 billion dollars in the hands of Obama and his cronies.
I hope the General is an honorable man. If court-martialed, he should accept the decision with honor.
To do otherwise would disgrace his past more-than-extraordinary service, and that would be a shame.