[AF] FCC environmental facts...

[Mike Vanhooser]

Yet not one can be shown to have a negative environmental impact.  Just because one administration removes punitive and overly burdensome restrictions set by a previous administration doesn't make it a bad thing, in most cases it is a good thing.  So let me address these seriatim;

1. The Obama administration did more to damage the environment than any previous administration in my lifetime (Truman, et seq).
The Deepwater Horizon accident was the first major offshore blowout since Ixtoc 1 in 1979.  On Ixtoc, Red Adair was immediately dispatched and the blowout was contained with a total spill of around 3 million barrels, and was the largest Gulf spill until Deepwater.  Ixtoc was largely contained by an armada of skimmer and collection ships from several foreign countries.  In Deepwater, the Obama administration deliberately restricted and blocked remediation efforts, whether through incompetence or malicious intent.  Numerous blowout specialists stepped up to help, and were rebuffed.  Several foreign countries volunteered cleanup and containment vessels, and were prohibited from participating.  This resulted in around 5 million barrels of oil released, and most ending up on American beaches.  No regulations which they subsequently imposed made this any likely to not happen again, it just made drilling more costly and cumbersome.

2. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient method of transporting oil and gas.  Previous efforts to limit pipelines resulted in most oil being transported by rail, with several major accidents that caused pollution and loss of life.  These rail transports were overwhelmingly handled by Burlington Northern.  Burlington Northern is owned by Warren Buffet, a close friend and supporter of Obama.  Connect the dots.

3. See above.

4. Logging is a renewable resource, and logging operations are highly beneficial to the health and well being of forests.  Primarily they clean up the forest from dead and diseased timber and debris, which helps prevent fires and insect infestations.  Only rabid environmental activists view this as a bad thing.

5. This is an area which needed massive overhaul.  Many innocent people had been prosecuted for harmless and innocuous maintenance on their own property, due to onerous regulations which were of no practical benefit, but made many people inadvertent criminals.  Again, this is a good thing, only opposed by the aforementioned environmental activists.

6. See all previous posts regarding the "global warming" hoax.

7. Again, not a problem, as the Arctic region has the best safety record in the industry.  There have been no blowouts or major spills in the Alaska drilling areas since the Exxon Valdez in 1989. There have only been two small leaks, one from a gas pipeline and one from a production well, neither of which caused any significant environmental damage.

So nothing that you have listed is in any way a precursor to environmental disaster.  What it does is make commerce and the environment better, but most environmental radicals and activists oppose such, and are anti-capitalism and/or pro-socialism, whether actively aware of it or not.  "Environmentalism" is by far more of a political construct that conservationism, which is the true protection and nurturing of the environment.  Conservationism is what has brought about the vibrant health and abundance of wildlife and wilderness.  Environmentalism has caused more death of wildlife and destruction of wilderness than all commercial activities combined.  What the Trump administration has done is to make conservationism the rule rather than environmentalism, which is the best thing that could happen.

On Sunday, August 25, 2019, 1:25:15 PM CDT, Kelly Alford via AF <af at radiolists.net> wrote:

I'll give you more than three: