Disgruntledpatriot's Blog

June 4, 2010

BP boycott does not hurt BP!

Filed under: Sick and Tired — Trever Bierschbach @ 5:38 am
Tags: , ,

Boycotts are becoming a very popular tool nowadays, and when used sensibly they can be a good way to sway the market.  Some boycotts, however, seem to be criminally ignorant.  The government backed boycott of Glenn Beck for instance.  He sure has a lot of fans to piss off Apple, are you really sure you want to side with Van Jones on this one?  How about Los Angeles boycotting Arizona?  Do they realize where they get most of their electricity?  My favorite so far was the call to boycott Arizona Tea…which is made in New York.  Yup, no affiliation to Arizona outside the name.

Now, we have a huge facebook group boycotting BP.  Sounds reasonable on the surface, but you have to ask yourself, can one really boycott BP?  Sure, you can refuse to buy gas from them, but BP stations are franchises.  Not buying gas from them only hurts local business owners.  BP sells their product to thousands of companies for thousands of uses.  Do you stop buying plastics?  Which plastics companies use BP oil?  Then there are questions about BP employees.  If the boycott does work, and BP goes out of business (which is the only goal of the boycott that I can see) what about the lost jobs?  What about the lost revenue for Louisiana, that is going to need that money more than ever now?  Hell, run this sentence through your head.  You boycott BP, which costs BP money that they need to clean up the oil, which means the cleanup is slower, which just makes you madder.

If you really want less oil spills, and safer rigs, a boycott is not the answer.  First of all demand the administration stop giving passes to these rigs.  The last administration and this one gave passes on safety measures to this very rig.  The exemption, as it’s called, was given to this same rig ten days before the accident.  Another rig was given an exemption two weeks after it.  If you want less spills push to lift the bans on close-to-shore drilling, where it’s safer.  They are drilling that deep because they have to.  Environmental lobbies are responsible for the fact that they have to go a mile deep to get oil.  Look at the leak in Alaska.  It was on land, sprung a leak, was contained by the safety measures, and will be cleaned up with no adverse effects to the environment.  We have enough oil under land in Alaska and in the shale to last us a very long time, but because of the greenies, companies have to drill where it’s dangerous for them, and for the environment.

Oh, one final though on the protesters/boycotters.  Stop throwing oil on BP stations.  Again, they are franchises, not owned by BP (do your homework idiots).  Not only that but don’t you understand how stupid that looks?  Spilling oil to protest an oil spill?  Really people, get some sense and do this right.  You don’t have to boycott BP, they are going to lose so much money in this it’s going to be ridiculous, and the government is going to have their ‘boot on their necks’ (sieg heil)  the whole time.  If that doesn’t make you warm and fuzzy inside then I don’t know how you can be helped.

May 5, 2010

Boots on the neck of BP?

Filed under: Sick and Tired — Trever Bierschbach @ 4:52 pm
Tags: , ,

Other than the strange wording of the title, has anyone else notice that the government seems to be coming down hard on BP for no obvious reason?  Let me be clear up front, BP is one of the companies responsible for the oil spill, and they should take care of things.  Thing is, that is exactly what they are doing.  From day one BP has been on site, working with clean-up, setting up land-based clean-up sites, hiring out-of-work fisherman to help, and offering $15M in grants to local communities impacted by the spill (wow that’s a lot of hyphens!).

We have the President coming down hard in his press conference, about this being BP’s fault and will be made to pay.  We have secretary Salazar saying we will keep our boots on the neck of BP, and Robert Gibbs repeating it.  Seems like BP is trying to do the right thing without even being asked, much less forced.  Could it possibly be that the government wants us distracted from the fact that they did not follow their own policies about oil disasters?  Is it possible they don’t want us to know about them exempting BP from putting shut-off valves on pipelines in April of 2009?  Don’t know about any of this stuff?  Well, seems the government has a policy that requires them to keep firebooms on hand in case of emergency.  They didn’t have any, and when they went to get one from the manufacturer, there was only one in stock.  Note the exemptions as well.  Both the last administration, and this one, exempted BP and others from implementing required safety features.

Beside all this you have Gibbs misquoting Brown, a former F.E.M.A. director who was on Fox the other night.  Gibbs said Brown intimated that the government started the spill on purpose.  Thing is, he didn’t, not even close.  You can see both segments at Fox’s website.  It really looks like they have a house full of rank amateurs there in Washington.  Now, I was talking to a friend the other day, and I have to say that this spill and it’s timing sure is suspicious.  There hasn’t been a major failure at an off-shore drill ever, that I am aware of, and now right after the government announces more drilling we have one of the largest single oil spills in history?  I am NOT saying the government is involved, it could just as likely be some environmental terrorists from E.L.F. or Greenpeace as far as I know.  It just seems odd is all.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.