You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘oil-spill’ tag.

The old rule in play: whenever Obama media dislikes something, it switches to “Feds” (the rule worked in reverse for Clinton). The Daily News uses “Bam” when they think it’s good news. Not today:

.See Newsday doing the same:
What will Bloomberg use now to buy new cameras for Times Square?

.WaPo sports a bizarre Rand Paul photo, plus oil rig faults news and Obama-Karzai accords. The subtitle is a peach: “At White House, two leaders look ahead to critical period of war”

Well, as long as they look ahead…

.USA Today reveals another milestone for that war – it’s more expensive than Iraq’s – and I don’t think it’s because the other one got cheaper. yeay! Let’s cut social security then!

.Murdoch Street Journal informes us of the widening probe now reaching other bailout recipients, and their poll indicating that voters switch to GOP

.For oil rig news, besides WaPo, local papers in LA on the causes of the accident

In other news, The Examiner reports on an increase in dating violence on campus

.and AMNY takes on Facebook and privacy


USA Today gets the cover of the day for that bellow the fold item implying that voters are too small minded for  the greatness that is Obama – the multi-dimensional chess is back!

The main item on the tabloids covers is UK’s new PM – the Lib Dems accomplishment in replacing a Labor PM with a Conservative one – yeay, team!

.The oil spill is more present in the news, even if WaPo choses a sunny beach photo from Alabama that gives the impression that hay bales make everything OK

.Even the local coverage is Pollyanish: Miami Herald has an ominous headline next to a cheerleaders shot

.In LA, they concentrate on the BP partners grilling in the senate

.Wall Street covers this too, and a Morgan Stanley inquiry for Goldman-sachs like speculation

In Pennsylvania, Specter’s woes finally make the cover – along with a deceitful headline on Obama and drilling oversight – yeah only 27 exemptions since the accident

.Back in NY, the Post takes on Paterson’s cuts

.AM NY on Transit Authority cuts

.Metro on the new Luna Park in Coney Island

.and for the usual cocktail

.Moonie Times

.and Obama Times


As the Time Square bomber’s Taliban connections are confirmed, Tabloids want to invade Pakistan. The Daily News gets cover of the day for the most crazed headline picking the hawkish mantle from NY Post

.Also, the spill gets worse, but it is disappearing from national headlines (off page one of Obama Times). So, from LA papers

.and Florida’s

.in DC, the examiner tallies the bills for the Nuclear Summit

.NY Metro ratchets the Taliban angle

.and interestingly enough, Stars and Stripes has a headline on them too, although the Afghanistan branch

NY Post choses to flog a totally different war, based on this idiotic quote

“You’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank all that high on the truth meter,” Obama said at Hampton University, Virginia.

“With iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations, — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation,”

.and for the usual news cockrail, the Rahm Post

.Axelrod’s Obama Times (sans spill)

.and Murdoch’s Wall Street


As the spill blackens the Atlantic coast, the news of Obama’s pay-off from BP made it out

BP Enjoys Lobbying Strength, Close Ties to Lawmakers as Federal Investigation Looms

During the 2008 election cycle, individuals and political action committees associated with BP — a Center for Responsive Politics’ “heavy hitter” — contributed half a million dollars to federal candidates. About 40 percent of these donations went to Democrats. The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 cycle was President Barack Obama himself, who collected $71,000.

.It wasn’t BP, silly, it was BP-s employees, B0botland offered. How many times do we have to explain this one – we already did with Goldman Sachs!

By the time the headline hit Politico as well

Obama biggest recipient of BP cash

.the Obama media had to spring in action. (or to use my recent lesson – not the media, silly, the B0bots in the media)

Here’s what New York Magazine had to say yesterday about it – note the quotation marks around “answer for”

Obama Has to ‘Answer For’ Donations From BP

they hand Politico a dose of righteous South Park snark

Now he and “members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they’ve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years,” according to Politico. Why did you take money from a company whose oil rig was going to explode two years later, Obama?!? Bastard!

Be careful what you snark, New York Magazine. How many ways did those money pay off for BP? Let me count the ways:

We know that since his campaign, Obama changed his mind (flip-flopped – if this were a regular candidate) on off shore drilling. But as NY Magazine said he couldn’t know their rig was going to explode two years later, right?

Not quite. It seems that before he was to embark on this disastrous policy, there were inklings

NOAA Warned Interior It Was Underestimating Threat Of Serious Spill

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration officials last fall warned the Department of Interior, which regulates offshore oil drilling, that it was dramatically underestimating the frequency of offshore oil spills and was dangerously understating the risk and impacts a major spill would have on coastal residents.

But NOAA’s views were largely brushed aside as Obama went ahead and announced on March 31 that he would open vast swaths of American coastal waters to offshore drilling

And what else did BP money buy? WaPo has another headline

U.S. exempted BP’s Gulf of Mexico drilling from environmental impact study

.So, after being warned by their own agency of the potential consequences

The Interior Department exempted BP’s calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.

So the recent empty promise that future leases will be given under further scrutiny merely meant :no more preferential treatment? (knowing there were no scheduled future leases).

And yet, the only headlines connecting Obama to the spill are

Obama vows ‘relentless’ response to oil spill

I bet he does. But he still didn’t change the off-shore drilling policy. Because as New York Magazine says

Why did you take money from a company whose oil rig was going to explode two years later, Obama?!? Bastard!

because as Condoleeza Rice famously said, “nobody expected planes to fly into towers”..

Move over oil spill! Now that the car bomber from Times Square has a face, all tabloids look the same.

I am giving the paranoiac cover of the day to the Daily News today

.AM-NY cover seems to answer that question

.the identical image on Metro tells us more

.Newsday tries to be different making a puzzle from the image

.While NY Post has a different photo – and apparently all the answers – now I get Obama’s Jonas Brothers joke: it almost was on NYC!

even Wall Street puts Europe’s trouble under the fold, way under  the bomber

.WaPo barely has a column for the spil to the right of today’s star: it;s bad

.and the same goes for Obama Times

Washington Times manages to squeeze a few more news on the page – on the bottom -“Obama Attacked on Oil Drilling”

.And Stars and Stripes shows the delight of the citizens of Okinawa at having Americans remaining on the military base there.


Not Your Sweetie

January 2020
« Dec