RUSH: The New York Times, the Washington Post, it’s everywhere. ‘On the Surface, Gulf Oil Spill Is Vanishing Fast; Concerns Stay — The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico appears to be dissolving far more rapidly than anyone expected –‘ No. There were a lot of us that expected this to happen. ‘– a piece of good news that raises tricky new questions about how fast the government should scale back its response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.’ Come on, New York Times, scale back? Does the federal government scale back in anything? It’s response? The moratorium goes on, jobs shut down, drilling shut down, 135,000 jobs kaput, $20 billion shaken down from British Petroleum.
Speaking of that: ‘BP said Tuesday that it plans to cut its U.S. tax bill by $9.9 billion, or about half the amount pledged to aid victims of the disaster, by deducting costs related to the oil spill. A portion of that could be refunded from taxes BP paid in earlier years. The company disclosed its intentions as part of its second-quarter earnings report, in which it said it would record a $32.2 billion charge to reflect the costs of the spill. Under U.S. corporate tax law, companies can take credits on up to 35 percent of their losses. The credit for BP could mean, however, that taxpayers will indirectly foot part of the bill for the $20 billion’ shakedown that BP was forced to pay by Obama ‘to compensate people and businesses harmed by the disaster.’ It doesn’t read that way in the Washington Post. I used my own words to make the story accurate, calling it a shakedown. Gonna cut their tax bill by $10 billion. This is said to be the taxpayer indirectly footing the bill.
From the USA Today: ‘Gulf Spill Has Not Fouled Most Beaches but Hurts Tourism.’ How did that happen? If the spill has not fouled the vast majority of beaches, how in the hell has tourism been hurt? Answer: the media! Answer: the fake media! Answer: partisan political operatives. If the spill has not fouled the vast majority of beaches and yet tourism is down, how is that possible? British Petroleum, BP knows the US tax code better than the government lawyers. They get shaken down for 20 bill, and they go out and take a charge that’s going to reduce the shakedown to ten. He-he-he-he-he-he. So BP is going to be paying less in taxes and penalties than Obama thought he was gonna get from them, all because of US tax law. You have to love it.
So the New York Times: ‘Reporters’ sorry, partisan political operatives ‘flying over the area Sunday spotted only a few patches of sheen and an occasional streak of thicker oil, and radar images taken since then suggest that these few remaining patches are quickly breaking down in the warm surface waters of the gulf. John Amos, president of SkyTruth, an environmental advocacy group that sharply criticized the early, low estimates of the size of the BP leak, noted that no oil had gushed from the well for nearly two weeks. ‘Oil has a finite life span at the surface,’ Mr. Amos said Tuesday, after examining fresh radar images of the slick. ‘At this point, that oil slick is really starting to dissipate pretty rapidly.” Nobody’s happy here. The media is not happy. They wanted a disaster. Obama’s not happy about it; the New York Times is not happy about it; nobody’s happy about this. I’m happy about it, H.R., I’m always happy when I’m right, which means I’m always happy.
‘The effect on sea life of the large amounts of oil that dissolved below the surface is still a mystery. Two preliminary government reports on that issue have found concentrations of toxic compounds in the deep sea to be low, but the reports left many questions, especially regarding an apparent decline in oxygen levels in the water.’ So the good news continues to roll in, damn it. Low levels of oil, can’t find the oil, where the hell is the oil? And then they say later in the story that this is the most oil that’s ever poured into the Gulf of Mexico. No, it’s not. The Mexicans dumped far more oil in the Gulf in the eighties. Ixtoc 1 is what it was called. ‘Understanding the effects of the spill on the shorelines that were hit, including Louisiana’s coastal marshes, is expected to occupy scientists for years.’ Federal grants no doubt will fund all of this interest. ‘Fishermen along the coast are deeply skeptical of any declarations of success, expressing concern about the long-term effects of the chemical dispersants used to combat the spill and of the submerged oil, particularly on shrimp and crab larvae that are the foundation of future fishing seasons.
‘An unknown percentage of the oil would have been eaten by bacteria, essentially rendering the compounds harmless and incorporating them into the food chain. But other components of the oil have most likely turned into floating tar balls that could continue to gum up beaches and marshes,’ which happens every day on beaches anyway ‘and may represent a continuing threat –‘ may represent? It might not represent a continuing threat, too. ‘A three-mile by four-mile band of tar balls was discovered off the Louisiana coast on Tuesday.’ Damn it. That’s no reason to be happy. We got tarballs, all right! This is Thad Allen, the Coast Guard admiral: ‘While we would all like to see the area come back as quickly as it can, I think we all need to understand that we, at least in the history of this country, we’ve never put this much oil into the water. And we need to take this very seriously.’ Who cares if we have or not? The Mexicans did and Mexico is still around, Texas shoreline is still around, we recover. New York Times.
And this is the Washington Post: ‘Oil from the BP blowout is degrading rapidly in the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico and becoming increasingly difficult to find on the water surface, the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Tuesday. ‘The light crude oil is biodegrading quickly,’ NOAA director Jane Lubchenco said during the response team daily briefing. ‘Significant oil has been dispersed and broken down by bacteria.” Mother Nature again. Who’s Mother Nature? Look at me. Mother Nature is God, leftists. Notice how harder to find is in the Washington Post headline, oil in Gulf degrading, becoming harder to find. Makes it sound like the oil is still there. Oil is still there like it’s hiding somewhere next to the 3.6 million jobs that have been created or saved. We know those jobs are there, too, but we can’t see ’em, we can’t find ’em. Where’s the oil? We’re looking for the oil. It’s just harder to find, like it’s hiding next to ten years of missing heat from global warming. But if the bacteria have eaten it, isn’t it actually gone?
The quotes at the end of this story: ‘A significantly more optimistic assessment of the environmental effects of the oil well blowout came Tuesday from Edward Owens, who worked with Exxon for four years on the Valdez spill in Alaska and who has been hired as a consultant to BP. Owens was quoted as saying the fragile Louisiana marshes would be close to pre-blowout condition within months and that the environmental impact on the gulf as a whole would be ‘quite small.” Whoa. Something’s going to have to happen to this guy. Doesn’t he realize the permanent destruction of the Gulf is now settled science? The permanent destruction, that’s the template, that’s the narrative. But get this. We have a media montage from anchors in New York City. Rush Limbaugh was right about all of this.
Linda Church: A lot of the scientists were saying that, you know, once they can cap it, that it should go right back to where it came from and that it wouldn’t — you know, I mean it’s done a lot of harm already, certainly to the fishing industry, but it wouldn’t be as bad as an accident like the Exxon Valdez…
FADAL: Yeah, right.
CHURCH: …because that was refined. It’s interesting.
BURROUS: Rush Limbaugh predicted this. He said the earth is amazingly (laughter) regenerative. Mark down this day. What is it, the 28th? Rush Limbaugh and The New York Times agree on something.
FADAL: You’re bound to get something right, right?
BURROUS: I can’t believe that.
FADAL: It’s amazing.
RUSH: What does the New York Times agree with me on? The New York Times and I don’t agree on anything. They’re ticked off they can’t find the oil. I said it’s not a mystery. They think it’s a mystery. Anderson Cooper last night on Anderson Cooper 25, he spoke with Louisiana State University Environmental Studies Professor Emeritus Ed Overton about the spill. Anderson Cooper said: ‘Ed, a Coast Guard official said that the oil is in its final life cycle. They aren’t finding much oil out there. Does this mean it’s gone? Has Mother Nature and the dispersants just broken it up already, Ed? Is it really gone, Ed?’
OVERTON: To a large extent. Remember, the spill stopped about ten days ago, so — and the Gulf was really acclimated to taking 60,000 barrels a day. So all of a sudden you have none, the bacteria are there, and they are degrading, very rapidly degrading what’s left.
RUSH: What does it mean, Ed? What does it mean? What does it mean for the future, Ed?
OVERTON: Long-term prognosis is not nearly as bad as some people have said. I think we’ll be pretty much back to normal in two to three years. There will be some environmental indicators that won’t come back for some time, but most, 90%, 90-plus percent will return to normal fairly quickly, and I think next summer we’ll have a hard time finding a lot of this oil. In general, our environment will recover. It’s amazing how resilient the environment is.
RUSH: I told you this three months ago.
RUSH: When we last left Anderson Cooper 25, he was being told by Ed Overton last night (summarizing), ‘Ah, it’s going to recover very quickly down there. It isn’t going to be any big deal. In two years it’ll be back to normal. We’re going to be back to no more in the Gulf before Obama’s finished destroying the US economy.’ But back on May 3rd, on Anderson Cooper 119, he had this exchange with the Earth Island Institute’s Riki Ott about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
COOPER: There’s been some truly weeeeird talk about the Gulf oil spill and it’s coming from both sides. Rush Limbaugh, Gene Taylor say this is just going to break up naturally. A, is that true; and B, does it mean we should just let nature take its course?
OTT: It’s going to ‘break up naturally,’ same as in Alaska. We’re going to probably wait 40 years or 50 years before it all ‘breaks up naturally,’ and what we’re going to see here probably in Louisiana with a little bit warmer temperature, maybe a little bit more rapid degradation. Maybe a little less than 50 years but who knows how much less.
RUSH: They can’t find it. So here we have the discreditation of all these so-called environmentalist wacko experts, ‘Fifty years! Disaster!’ and there’s Anderson Cooper 225 buying it, plain and simply think I’m a nut. Now they can’t find the oil. It’s going to be gone two or three years. They can’t find it.