Friday, November 25, 2011

New York Times Throws A Pity Party For The "Poor" New York Environmentalists...

As soon as I realized the NYT had put up an article discussing hydrofracking in New York, I pulled it up, expecting not an ounce of fairness, reality, or rationality to make its way into the article.

And I was not disappointed.

Leftist ideology seep into your news reporting much lately, ladies?

This could have been written by a high school journalist - or drama student:

Energy companies have been pouring millions of dollars into television advertising, lobbying and campaign contributions as the administration of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo enters the final phase of deciding when and where to allow a controversial form of natural gas extraction that is opposed by environmental groups.

Companies that drill for natural gas have spent more than $3.2 million lobbying state government since the beginning of last year...national energy companies are advertising heavily in an effort to convince the public that the extraction method, commonly known as hydrofracking, is safe and economically beneficial.

Environmental groups, with far less money at their disposal, are mounting a more homespun campaign as they warn that hydrofracking — a process in which water mixed with sand and chemicals is injected deep into the ground to break up rock formations and release natural gas — could taint the water supply and cause untold environmental ruin.

One environmental group held a Halloween contest in which participants were asked to design costumes for drill rigs. And, claiming Mr. Cuomo is rushing the approval process for drilling by collecting public comments for only 90 days, environmentalists delivered 180 water-powered clocks to the governor’s Capitol office, representing the number of days they are asking him to allow for people to weigh in.

So we get a "controversial" form of energy extraction, we get the prototypical bad guys - Big Energy and their Dirty Dollars, and we get the standard good guys - "homespun" environmentalists.

Of course, maybe the reason that the Greenies have no cash behind their jihad is because it is only the nutjobs who find hydro-fracking to be "controversial".  Despite blatant, front page lies told by the New York Times about the process, not a single drop of water anywhere has ever been tainted by hydrofracking.

In Pennsylvania, where the environmentalist are trying to put a halt to the hydrofracking boom, polling has been...interesting, to say the least:

“Pennsylvania voters say 63 – 30 percent that the economic benefits of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale outweigh the environmental impacts. Support is strong among men, women, all parties and in all regions, ranging from 55 – 38 percent among voters in the northeast corner of the state to 69 – 25 percent among voters in the northwest corner.

To be exact, the poll shows that: 52% of Democrats, 67% of Union Households, and 58% of women favor drilling opposed to the caution of the environmental impact.

Because maybe 44,000 Pennsylvania hydrofracking jobs is more "homespun" than water-powered clocks?

Funny how the New York Times inverts reality here.  It is Big Energy that is actually the good guy here - speaking up for us by lobbying to create thousands of jobs and provide cheaper energy in New York, while is the environmentalist who are actually the bad guys in this  drama - looking to stop economic growth and energy independence in the name of service to their perverted green god.

And the Times, of course, stands with evil.  Not for the first time, nor the last...


Zing. said...

Anonymous said...

Last time I checked, the concerns surrounding hydrofracking were about the health of human beings, not what you refer to as "the environment".