At his State of the Union address last night, President Obama made a clunker of a joke about the EPA "crying over spilled milk" by requiring dairy farmers to have milk-containment plans rather than focusing on hazardous substances like oil.
Well, it turns out that massive milk spills can be just as dangerous as leaky BP tankers. According to a report about an April 2000 milk spill in England…
Wildlife was put at risk when 3,000 litres of milk was spilled into Galmington stream in Trull, Taunton, on Wednesday afternoon.
Ben Woodhouse of the Environment Agency said: "The problem is that microbes in the water work on decomposing the milk, which takes the oxygen out of the water causing the fish to die."
Gawker's John Cook dug up several other examples of catastrophic milk spills that either threatened to kill thousands of fish or endangered the local water supply. Like this 2007 Washington spill…
Darigold [dairy farm] failed to follow proper operating, maintenance and notification procedures during a February 2007 milk spill that discharged polluted water to the city of Lynden. The spill caused the wastewater treatment plant to malfunction, resulting in the release of polluted, mostly untreated sewage to the Nooksack River.
You heard it here first. President Obama is soft on milk. The American people demand to know: Where does the President stand on other dairy products? Is Obama soft on soft cheese? Is he hard on cheddar? What about yogurt, or even Go-Gurt? And what about milk-related foods? All of these jokes about milk spills may be distracting us from the menace of chocolate chip cookies.
John Boehner and congressional Republicans should exploit this weakness and demand to know why Obama does not feel the need to cry over spilled milk. Because if anyone knows the value of crying about trivial things, it's John Boehner.
Photo by Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
Tags: Barack Obama, Energy & Oil, Environment, EPA, Food, State of the Union