LOL...given all the information available, I described the article accurately, IMHO. One sided, ignoring real facts.
So you are tired of that "crap."
Well boohoo. About 13% of folks agree this is mainly Bush's fault, or so I gather a poll says. You are a 13%er.
Re: "Bush appointed a nobody with no knowledge to head one of the most important offices"
I'm so glad to have heard that again. It's tells no tale. The man may certainly do an adequate job for all you are aware of as yet. Right, he didn't step in and say "move all those people out ahead of time." Bush didn't say it either. It would have been nice to have a leader who would have taken the reigns and gone the extra mile on his own sooner. Local, State, Federal...they all failed to produce such a leader.
Re: "But the companies don't need this oil. They're already swimming in it.
30% of our supply flows through New Orleans one way or another, the place is shut down, and you write that? LOL...give us a break.
Re: "Pouring more oil into the marketplace didn't reduce gasoline prices, which kept on going up, hitting $4 a gallon in some places."
LOL, it's actually fallen a bit since those reserves started flowing, be that the reason or not. You mention $4.00 gas, but that was before actions intended to relieve the situation actually happened. The writer identified no reality at all with that sentence. It's been barely over a week since they noticed the levees broke, and now it's $3.00 gas.
The article starts out clueless, and ends up having filled us in with some truth, but failed to recognize it in it's own analysis.
Dan B. |
