Monday, June 16, 2008

EPA & The Simpsons.

While watching The Simpson's Movie, we were trying to read the little note at the beginning from the EPA. The note says something about how they don't appreciate the way they are portrayed in the movie, yada yada.. but the screen goes to quickly to read the entire thing.

So, naturally, I figured I could find the answer on the internets. Because the internets know everything, right?

I haven't found the little screen at the beginning yet. But, what I did find was an apology from the EPA to the citizens of Springfield. On the EPA's website:


The Simpsons Movie has grossed almost $500m since opening in July. EPA plays an
important role in the plot. Spencer Friedman and Jeffrey Roberson in the Office
of the Chief Financial Officer have sent along the following draft letter for my
signature. I’ve informed them I might sign it -- for a dozen donuts. Mmmm donuts . . . .

Ahoy hoy citizens of Springfield:

I am writing to apologize for the way the city of Springfield was treated during the recent environmental disaster. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA -- pronounced ee-pee-ay, notee-pah) admits that our reaction might have been, well . . . a little extreme. We always try to err on the side of protection. Nonetheless, in this case we may have gone a bit too far. Maybe.

An internal review has helped identify a few areas where EPA’s efforts could have been improved. First, we have determined that enclosing Springfield in a giant glass dome was counterproductive because it exacerbated local greenhouse effects (although it was very good for Groundskeeper Willie’s thistle). Second, “roving death squads” were not a productive use of the EPA’s helicopter fleet. (Okay, it's one helicopter.) Also, the purchase of 5,000 Humvees to patrol the city might have been an unwarranted use of taxpayer money. (But they were hybrids getting at least forty rods to the hogshead!) Finally, EPA’s response time was unreasonably delayed. We found this was primarily caused by our inability to determine in which state Springfield is located.

Were an environmental disaster of this magnitude to happen again in
Springfield (and under Mayor Quimby’s leadership, it will -- the Mayor couldn’t
lead a monkey to a banana raffle), here are two alternative approaches the EPA
would consider:

Instead of a glass dome, we might encase the city in some organic or biodegradable material such as Jell-O™. This would be a ‘win-win’ as it would also reduce Springfield’s chronic Jell-O™ surplus.

The EPA could immediately siphon off the polluted water from Lake Springfield and sell it to Duff Brewery. After extensive examination of Duff Beer, often going late into the night, scientists at our Szyslak Laboratory say they are 'pretty sure' that chemicals contained in the lake can neutralize contaminants normally found in a can of Duff Beer.

EPA’s ultimate goal has always been to protect the health and well-being of the citizens and environment of Springfield. We will not fail you again.

Hoy,

Marcus Peacock
Deputy Administrator
US Environmental Protection Agency

Spencer and Jeffrey, thanks for a good laugh . . . now, get back to work.

And that, my friends, proves that there are, in fact, people in government with a) a sense of humor and b)real people in the government. At least at EPA.

Oh, and if you have found the EPA disclaimer, let me know. I'll link to it here too.

5 comments:

Not the Momma said...

don't worry... I think in about another 50 times we will be able to figure out what the h@!! the stupid warning says.

Vanessa said...

Do you own it? Can you pause it on that screen? Does that even work?

Momma Mary said...

Yes we own it. No, it won't pause. UGH!

Ooh, but maybe I'll take a picture!

Vanessa said...

Did the picture work? Ohhhh, I'm dying of suspense. Not really, but you can pretend. :)

Marcus said...

It's in a kind of code. It can only be read by magnifying it through the bottom of an empty Duff's beer bottle.

Hoy.