E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe EPA has been a whipping boy for congressional Republicans and GOP presidential candidates.
And today, President Obama "abruptly pulled back proposed new national smog standards Friday morning, overruling the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to compel states and communities nationwide to reduce local air pollution in the coming years or face federal penalties," the Washington Post writes.
The Post called it "a win for the business community, which had lobbied to postpone new restrictions on ground-level ozone—known as smog—until 2013 in light of the current economic downturn."
Daniel J. Weiss at liberal think tank the Center for American Progress told the Post: “It’s unfortunate that the administration is siding with big oil over the health of children, seniors, and the infirm."
To that point, the American Petroleum Institute liked it: “The President’s decision is good news for the economy and Americans looking for work," said Jack Gerard, API's president. "EPA’s proposal would have prevented the very job creation that President Obama has identified as his top priority."
He contended: "Ozone levels and air quality continue to improve under current regulations and our industry is committed to making the air we all breathe cleaner while creating new jobs."
And: “The oil and natural gas industry was one of the few industries to actually create jobs in August. With the right public policies, we can do more to help generate more American jobs and help get our economy back on track.”
Leave a Comment:
Pretty obvious now we voted for the wrong Democrat. Deep sigh....
WOW. Just WOW.
THis is fantastic news and will go a long way to help the job situation.
In fact I see this as a real watershed moment.
It's hard to admit you are wrong. He has just done it, and in a HUGE way. Now he needs to reign in the deisel regs and we'll be in business- at least then the 25% of the trucking industry will not disappear.
You know, what with the current tax cuts, and all the tax cuts coming after the big speech, this guy is turing out to be less bad.
And oh my god, but this is going to really chaffe the libbies' hide.
Cern cloud study. It's a game changer, even for the most die hard AL GORE types.
You know something else the result of this is likely to "chaffe" or irritate, Spanky? My grandson's asthma.
Thanks for your concern
And today, President Obama "abruptly pulled back proposed new national smog standards Friday morning, overruling the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to compel states and communities nationwide to reduce local air pollution in the coming years or face federal penalties," the Washington Post writes.
The Post called it "a win for the business community, which had lobbied to postpone new restrictions on ground-level ozone—known as smog—until 2013 in light of the current economic downturn."
__________________________________
This is the first of many moves that will make lefty liberals heads EXPLODE!!!
He seems to be about to tack sharply to the right in a (hopefully) futile attempt to "fool all of the people, all of the time'.
Barry has finally accepted the fact that his lefty liberal policies are a dismal failure. On last night's Wiffleball, MSDNC lefty liberal mouthpiece Howard Fineman said that his discussions with the WH indicate they are thinking that the 2012 campaign must be about "how much worse it would be if the Republicans are in charge after the 2012 election" because he has no visible accopmlishments he can run on.
Hmmmm.... I wonder why Barry wouldn't be shouting from the rooftops about what he did with HCR????
I would think that one would be a SURE winner??
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh don't thank me rick, thank Obama.
So your son has asthma, as does one of mine, and you conclusively know that the cause of that asthma is ozone levels?
Interesting. Hey, do you know when the first documented case of asthma was? Any idea what the ozone levels where then?
So hook us up with the inormation that establishes the link between your grandson's issue and the ozone levels.
I hate it when I have those moments that I want to grab the President by the throat and say, "What the hell are you thinking?"
I hate it when I have that nagging thought that this is going to be one of those "lesser of two evils" election.
Dammit. There's bankers that need to be in prison. We can't stop attempts to control pollutants that are killing our water, air, and soil. We MUST raise taxes. We MUST stop waste, fraud, and abuse, AND punish those behind it.
I will not look at the President as an "angry black man" for doing his job. I just want an "angry man" who's tired of watching this country being gutted, looted, pillaged, plundered, and turned into a gigantic toxic dump.
It's the Trojan Horse gambit, pretend to be pro-business until elected.... then go back to the far left where your comfort level is! Nice political ploy Obama!
David so True. I sometimes wish that the President would grow a set and kick these bastards in the a$$. And yes, all of these bastards on the far right should be in jail where they belong.
David Walker
____________________________________
The first of many lefty liberal head's EXPLODES!!!!!!
I'm looking forward to seeing Nasty Redhead all over the walls and ceiling.
Pride and Joy, you are correct except a true to form Obama would never attack union workers! It's the rest of us non-union folks he doesn't care for...
First - it is grandson
Second, did I say that the cause of the asthma was the ozone levels? no. I do know, though, that ozone is a contributing factor in asthma irritability. Ozone is just one. There are others.
If you want the literature, go look it up. The ALA (American Lung Association) can hook you up.
Once again, those who argue that they're only looking out for our children's futures need to ask themselves what kind of future will it be.
And one more thing that may stir a third party challenge from the LEFT.
You reap what you sow. And today, we sowed the air quality of Beijing for our children and grandchildren to reap.
Violent are the Democrats.
Obama isn't stupid. But he did make a huge mistake thinking the economy would be cruising along by now at a 4-5% GDP with 6% unemployment by now, and he could enact all his tree hugger legislation with little impact to the economy. Obama knows that more regulation equals less jobs, so this move was a no-brainer, even for him.
I'm certain Obama will bring this positive move of his up in his speech on Thursday.
By the way, some questions for our environmental experts --
How much can it help job creation to put off implementation of the smog standards until 2013?
And why would we want to let smog get two years worse before we address it?
And what other significance could such a date possibly have?
Any thoughts?
One bestowed on to them riddled with all of our debt.
Business leaders have to breath too. Cough Cough. Short sighted American corportists prove once again the financial crisis was no fluke, America is slowly dying because business leaders aren't just greedy, they are incompetent.
The debt want matter if they are all dead from lung cancer.
And one more thing that may stir a third party challenge from the LEFT.
________________________________________
Hmmmm.... isn't that just about what happened to Jimmy Carter when the Hero of Chappaquiddick, Ted Kennedy, ran against him in a 1980 Dem Presidential primary??
Of course, it did result in a good outcome in the 1980 election.
"Hope and Change, the 2012 Edition"
The favorite Dem 2012 bumper sticker:
Hillary 2012: Yeah, You Screwed It Up In 2008
Exactly. Which they all will be, having no health insurance to pay for treatment, and no jobs with which to buy insurance. Hedge fund managers, on the other hand, will be just fine inside their bubbles.
I'm sorry. Did I say this was a GOOD thing? To understand my perspective better, you might want to reminisce about 1992 -- a guy named Perot, I believe it was, that time.
And democrats -- especially the one in the White House -- might do well to remember 2000, where, if not for a certain environmentalist third party candidate named Nader, Al Gore wins Florida easily, and without any consideration of hanging chads.
Amy dear - this is Obama's doing, not greedy business people.
THis, like cutting tax rates in 12/10 is on him. He is tho only one with the power to do it.
So if this is cause America to die, blame the guy who made it happen.
But you won't cause you'd have to re-draw your Trapper Keeper.
I suggest you change that dragon Obama is slaying to the EPA.
Pride and Joy - there is spin, then there is simple delusion. THe bloom is off the rose. This stuff just makes it worse.
Come on AM - mount the charge. Get all them union folk in Wisc to rally around Hillary, or ABO. You all should at least try to make it a race. At this point it's just a race between Obama and Mondale's vote totals.
A river near by that I have fished in all my life recently posted at all of it's accesses that "no more than 2.6 lbs of fish taken from the river per week should be consumed by any adult, children and pregnant women should avoid any consumption." My grandfather, my father, and I have fished and eaten fish from this river all our lives, it is where I taught my children how to fish. After some investigation I found that the fish are contaminated with mercury that comes solely from coal fired power plants. My point is that pollution is not some imaginary "boogie man" dreamt up by some liberal tree hugger, it's here, it's real, and it is effecting you and your loved ones today.
"But he did make a huge mistake thinking the economy would be cruising along by now at a 4-5% GDP with 6% unemployment by now..."
That's right. And you knew better yourself back then, didn't you? But- can you tell us HOW you knew?
I'm sorry. Did I say this was a GOOD thing?
____________________________________
No. I did.
LMAO!!!!
"Hope and Change, the 2012 Edition"
The favorite Dem 2012 bumper sticker:
Hillary 2012: Yeah, You Screwed It Up In 2008
d b o, those of us who didn't vote for the guy in 2008 knew! We just didn't realize then how much damage he could cause in just 3 years!
He was successful in one area..... the government is bigger than ever, and more Americans are dependent on it for food stamps and welfare! That would not be my idea of success, but a liberal might see it that way!
Pride and Joy
"It's the Trojan Horse gambit, pretend to be pro-business until elected.... then go back to the far left where your comfort level is! Nice political ploy Obama!"
See- he ripped it outta the Bawkmann playbook on "working for the IRS because your husband said to.....no...I mean.... so I can infiltrate them".
See- he's only infiltrating the 'anti-regs' crowd so he can see how they work!
Ha Ha Ha Ha........That old copy-cat.
"d b o, those of us who didn't vote for the guy in 2008 knew"
Ok, 'Joanna'- HOW did you know?
(and do you know what the gov't head count is now, vs then? I don't, but am willing to learn)
Glad I could give you a giggle.
Seriously, Joe. Republicans would have treated Hillary worse, if that's even possible to conceive. They demonstrate time and time again how little respect they really have for women, not to mention REALLY smart women. Look how they treat Michelle Obama, and she's not even a threat to them.
dbo, unfortunately it is too little, too late for Obama! He's done just like Jimmy Carter was after 1 term! The only question is how badly he will lose! Also, will Hillary run against him? or maybe Trump will run as a democrat!
Seriously, Joe. Republicans would have treated Hillary worse, if that's even possible to conceive. They demonstrate time and time again how little respect they really have for women
________________________________________
Don't get me wrong. I would not have voted for Hillary because she was too far to the left for my tastes. Yeah, you are probably right, the R's wouldn't have treated Hillary any better than they have Barry. But, if I am stuck with a Dem in the White House, I would prefer it be, at least, one that is minimally competent to deal with the nation's problems.
BTW, I'm not a Republican, I'm registered as an independent. I subscribe to the Groucho Marx theory that I would not want to join any organization that would allow someone like me to be a member.
And Groucho's is the ONLY Marxist theory I subscribe to.
Spanky, you know that's not the whole story. The GOPTP continue to hold America hostage.
You keep telling us that business cannot hire or function because regulations are killing the economy. It's YOUR cause and effect. It IS greedy business.
With the way the GOPTP treats women, you expect us to believe Hillary would have been a better choice for the country?!
Don't insult us!
You know, I'm almost, and I mean ALMOST, starting to feel sorry for this cat. Not sorry enough to ever vote for him mind you....lol...but just sorry enough. He caves on EVERYTHING!
It's not Mr. Obama's fault that all these liberals put him up on a pedastal in the '04 elections and decided he could walk on water in '08.
It's like I've always said, it's as if him and his family found the winning lottery ticket and still can't believe it. Who amongst us would not have cashed that bad-boy in?
Mr. Obama can come over for a BBQ. It's the screaming liberals out there that have me rolling off of my chair.
Lean Forward Baby!
Fielden,
You're kidding right?!??!? My God I hope that's sarcasm. After the '08 elections Liberals have lost ALL credibility in the "Women's Equality" debate.
The way conservative women got treated by liberals was so raunchy, by any other standard it would have set women back 50 years...lol
It should be obvious by now. Every time the Republicans come up with populist BS, the president takes it away.
Okay, we'll join in and be against ear marks, we'll agree to tort reform, we'll dismantle Fannie and Freddie. And then we'll extend the Bush tax cuts, we'll cut spending, we'll stop the EPA. And guess what? It has NO impact on a damn thing, most notably job creation.
Record-high corporate profits exist regardless. Investments continue (including treasury bonds). Because taxes or regulation or supposed uncertainty is a bunch of chicken crap. Look at GDP, look at supply and demand, look at the REAL root of the problem.
It's like a virus though. The Republicans will just go out and find a new whipping boy. Let's speculate on what the next one will be...
Whatever you do, First Readers...
DON'T read the comments about this over at Firedoglake.com.
Those liberal/progressives are just CRAZY!
I'm guessing that most of these folks would actually favor a primary challenge to President Obama...!
And...these aren't Tea Party people, either!
Heck...
They might even give their cash...and, volunteer their time to an alternative.
They're really insane, aren't they?
With the way the GOPTP treats women, you expect us to believe Hillary would have been a better choice for the country?!
Don't insult us!
____________________________________
You insult yourself.
If I have to be stuck with a Dem in the WH, Hillary would have been a far better choice than Barry.
Political "balls" have no gender. See: Margaret Thatcher, Golda Mier, Indira Ghandi, and Benazir Bhutto.
Barry just wishes he had the political "balls" of these women.
"Hope and Change, the 2012 Edition"
The favorite Dem 2012 bumper sticker:
Hillary 2012: Yeah, You Screwed It Up In 2008
Are you kidding me?
The difference in qualifications between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin is SO apparent that even conservatives ought to -- and most do -- know MUCH better than this.
Palin, who put the whole pitbull with lipstick thing out there, and proceeded to put her foot in her mouth every time she opened it, deserved every lick she got and then some.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, was criticized mostly for not looking good in a pantsuit, and that came mostly from conservatives, as I recall it.
Look to your own house first, and I think you'll find it needs some cleaning.
DON'T read the comments about this over at Firedoglake.com.
___________________________
Jane Hampster and her site are really FUNNY!!!
And, what's with that freaky space-alien look??
http://twitter.com/#!/janehamsher
These ridiculous regulations for clean air and water are as ridiculous as the working poor not sharing enough of the sacrifice and middle class workers who expect decent wages and trust funds like Social Security, and medical care for the elderly through Medicare, and FEMA and public schools and... well unless Michele Bachmann benefits from government handouts or Rick Perry can use it to reward campaign donors and buy votes...
Al Gore in 2000, John Kerry in 2006 -- Bush/Cheney was a mistake! McCain/Palin would have been a nightmare, and Perry/Bachmann would take the nation completely off the cliff. The liberal sphere is not talking about Hillary--that's Rovian hype from conservatives. Nothing to see here people, move along...
You may be right, we may be crazy. There's a lot of sentiment for this, and not just among the FDL crowd. I hear it every day around here. I am always opposed to third party candidates precisely because it more-or-less dooms that side's party nominee, but I am having REAL trouble figuring out how to support a Democrat (perhaps in name only) who abandons organized labor after promising to walk side-by-side with them, abandons his pro-environment agenda without even putting up a fight, sells out on the public option for health care reform from the very first day, and bows to Republicans on economic policy at every single turn. We still have DADT and DOMA, and no action has been taken on immigration. For all the talk, there are no jobs -- but not because the stimulus was too big, rather because it was too small. Foreign policy is THE only area where I am currently still supporting the President's policies, and if we don't see some direction soon for Afghanistan, that is subject to change. We lost 67 soldiers there last month alone, and I have no idea for what.
So, if that's crazy, then count me in. Or out, as the case may be.
Palin, who put the whole pitbull with lipstick thing out there, and proceeded to put her foot in her mouth every time she opened it, deserved every lick she got and then some.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, was criticized mostly for not looking good in a pantsuit, and that came mostly from conservatives, as I recall it.
______________________________________
AM: when you put Sarah Palin and "deserved every lick she got and then some" in the same sentence, you've got my attention. Hillary didn't flatter herself with the pantsuits, but, the halo lefty liberals placed on Barry doesn't seem to be doing the country much good either.
"Hope and Change, the 2012 Edition"
The favorite Dem 2012 bumper sticker:
Hillary 2012: Yeah, You Screwed It Up In 2008
You may be right, we may be crazy
____________________________________
Isn't that a Billy Joel song:
You may be right, I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for
Turn out the light, don't try to save me
You may be wrong for all I know, but you may be right
Ms. Anna Molly,
Can we at least be intellectually honest enough to admit that womens issues only matter when the woman has a D after her name? Btw, Ms. Palin was not running against Ms. Clinton. If you recall nobody even heard of Palin until AFTER Clinton dropped out. She was McCains running mate.
If qualifications are the benchmark by which you gauge a candidate, it begs the question, why did anyone vote for Mr. Obama?
McCain's VP running mate (Palin) had much more actual executive experience than the Democrat presidential candidate. Denial of that nugget shows the hypocrisy of liberals. Seriously, cite me an example of just ONE of Mr. Obama's executive accomplishments prior to his nomination.
The FACT remains nobody can. He was elected on false hope. He just didn't know what he was doing.
You may be right, I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for
Turn out the light, don't try to save me
You may be wrong for all I know, but you may be right
Paging Ron Paul...I have a campaign song for you...
Dbo, those of us who knew that the economy would NOT be cruising along at five or sox percent growth by now told why, two and a half years ago.
You would not listen, because you chose to believe in hope for change.
In fact, a year and a half ago, those of us who understood why Obama's policies were doomed to fail predicted that he would lose the House- and perhaps the Senate. Y'all said we were crazy then- because the economy would be cruising along at five or six percent growth by last fall, and then we'd see.
We saw.
You chose not to listen, because while some of the dazzle had fallen off the poster, you still stubbornly clung to your hope for change. Here's the deal- you GOT the change. It just wasn't what you hoped for.
Think of it this way- a teenaged kid wants, desperately, to buy a used car. He begs, he pleads, he knows it will change hia life. He will be Mr. Kool. He will impress all the girls! His buddies will envy him!
When he gets the thing, it breaks down every week, and he needs to work more hours at his part time job to pay for the repairs. He has no life- just working for the car- until he loses the part time job. Now, said car sits on blocks in his parents' garage, a grim reminder of his hope for change.
That's where the country is- the economy is up on blocks, and the intelligent people are hoping for a change, okay- the one that comes when Obama gets booted from office.
Oh, and Spanky? I don't often disagree with you, but here goes- Obama did NOt just admit he was wrong.
Nope. Not him. It was the fault of EPA Director. She had to get reined in! She overstepped! She was trying to sabotage him, or misguided, but, whatever, it was her fault. Not his.
I wonder if something similar is coming down on the NLRB.
AM-
I support the President's Afghanistan policy.
"We lost 67 soldiers there last month alone..."
In a 36-day battle at Iwo Jima, the United States suffered 26,000 casualties against Japanese forces...and, 6000 U.S. soldiers were killed as a part of the effort to defeat Imperial Japan.
How do you imagine you might have reacted to those statistics in February, 1945, AM?
We know how most Americans did.
Do you really believe that Imperial Japan represented any greater threat then to western values than Islamic extremism does today?
Honestly...I don't get it.
I think that's unfair. I know how I would have reacted. And so do you.
What I don't know is exactly how we're advancing the ball against Islamic extremism with our current approach. They're nothing but dust bunnies, and you can't kill a dust bunny. You can vacuum it up or you can sweep it down the road. We've vacuumed up a few, but what we seem to be doing in Afghanistan, for the most part, is merely sweeping them down the road, just to spring up in the next town or the next province or the next country.
You, I am sure, know what's going on in Iraq. As soon as we leave, civil war is bound to erupt, with the probable result that Iraq becomes a Shiite nation under the thrall of Iran. Was that worth the lives that we wasted and the money that we spent? And from all I can see, the same thing happens in Afghanistan if we leave. How long, then, are we prepared to stay?
Truman answered that question regarding Japan. Horrible as it was, I might even have supported that as it seemed likely to work, which it did. But what's the answer here, Bag Boy? Or don't you believe there has to be an answer? Do we just continue down the same path forever without doing any real nation building or anything much to address the reasons why terrorism exists in the first place? How many soldiers are we prepared to sacrifice, 67 at a time, without a plan? Are they less important than those soldiers lost at Iwo Jima? And how much money will we spend?
And, ultimately how, exactly, is this different from Vietnam? At least to that extent?
Anna Molly-
You're a well educated female professional.
In Afghanistan, under the Taliban, that would have guaranteed you a burka and enforced silence.
Or, alternatively (if you resisted), a prison sentence and possibly , death.
THAT'S unfair, AM.
Vietnam?
I'm a Vietnam vet.
I served there.
I can assure you that the Vietnamese conflict never posed any existential threat to core western values, or the western notion of civilization. Our political leadership (Kennedy through Nixon) at the time posed far more of a threat.
Islamic fundamentalism most assuredly does pose a deadly threat to core western values.
Believe it.
They want to kill cartoonists, AM.
What does the left intend to do about Islamic extremism?
Other than hand-wringing?
Tell me I've got that all wrong.
As long as the President wants to do more than whine about Islamic extremism...I'll support him on that, if nothing else.
Anna Molly - Kudos on your 1.39 post for telling it like it is. I regretfully agree with your post.
Yesterday you spoke about wandering in the wilderness, it looks like we are in the wilderness already. The Democratic party and ideals gets bruised again. This is another self inflicted wound. Just like this decision will affect the next generation's health. poitically it may very well be the one that keeps Progressives wandering for a generation.
Lets face it we are supporting Obama for his veto pen and that is it. Nothing will come of his speech, he can go big or small it won't matter. This President might as well change his party affiliation to independent because he clearly isn't seeking Democratic support.
have you checked it out, yet, Spanky? Have you seen how your shallowness can hurt your son and my grandson? Yes, it is fun to be contrarion (sp?)...to think that the 'libbies' think one way, so i'll go the other. But, does that make it good? Does that make it right?
Seriously, buddy boy, you have understand how wrong you are.
It's almost like he doesn't want to be re-elected.
I'm starting to think the same thing Rick! ;o(
Who the hell needs clean air to breath?
Sure he wants to get re-elected - it's all about political calculus, screw the base because they have nowhere else to go. He's going after the independents and moderates and placating business. I don't like the move but I can't begrudge it under the current political climate. The republicans would jump all over this if he sided with the EPA on this right now.
Thanks for the glass half full analogy Mav!
I needed that! ;o)
rick in savannah
"It's almost like he doesn't want to be re-elected."
I was hoping it was more like: He thinks 'his base' is more realistic and open to helping improve the economy for now, than is 'their base'.
This is starting to get good!
**Popcorn?**
Poor Feisty and Drive - them pom poms just keep getting heavier and heavier, eh?
Just wait till next week - if you loved this, you are going to love the tax breaks and business incentives.
Mav - you rightly note the dem base won't move. You all say repeatedly that Big Business is the republican base, so your statement applies to business as well. It will not move.
Plus, now there's blood in the water, We need the dust, fence and run off regs gutted too.
I'm starting to think the same thing Rick! ;o(
_________________________________
Um....... Barry did foreshadow that he could be a one term President. Didn't he??
Now, THAT'S "Hope and Change I can believe in"!!!!!
*cough*...*cough*......gag...argh.
Business incentives...Hmmm, doubt there well be much for paper pushers like you spankster. Now if you're talking about investment tax credits for capital equipment and accelerated depreciation for the dwindling manufacturing base in the country then I'm for that...Any thing that will spur demand for U.S. manufactured goods.
And Jo lest you and the other conservatives forget...This President does not have a Ted Kennedy and fractured Democratic Party to deal with like Carter...Keep using the analogy of Carter and Obama though. Most of us will hold our noses and vote for him as opposed to ANY of the current crop of morons on your team. And lastly this false equivalency argument that you use equating "business experience" to running the government: let me remind you that Bush had an MBA..We all know the rest of that story.
Employer payroll holiday my man.
Did I mention a huge bump to the self employed?
Sweet.
Now get back out there and make something.
Now if you're talking about investment tax credits for capital equipment and accelerated depreciation for the dwindling manufacturing base in the country then I'm for that...Any thing that will spur demand for U.S. manufactured goods.
___________________________________________
Including those "evil" corporate jets Barry and the lefty liberals have been demonizing for month's now?? Those "evil" corporate jets that Cessna manufactures in Kansas while employing thousands of Americans??
You lefty liberals would be funny, if you weren't so pathetic.
"The Post called it "a win for the business community, which had lobbied to postpone new restrictions on ground-level ozone—known as smog—until 2013 in light of the current economic downturn.""
But see, it's the phrase "...until 2013 in light of the current economic downturn" that is key.
Look at how much other work could be done, if people would allow it, at least until the ecomomy gets back on track. Like taxes. Don't raise them forever, but why not raise them some, at least until the ecomomy improves?
Obama seems to think exactly the opposite Drive By, and he is after all according to you, "the smartest man alive."
You must admit, he is a pragmatist...
"...according to you, "the smartest man alive.""
Plese post my comment that says "the smartestm an alive"- otherwise, looks like we got a 'lawyer' that dabbles in 'hearsay'.
I thought Obama said he was "The most interesting man in the world".
Stay thirsty my friends. http://dosequis.com/
So now that the environmentalist all hate Obama, are they racist, neo-Nazis also?
Navy - what you got on this issue?
Sadly, I fear we will be seeing less and less of the libbies around here. Pom-poms just too heavy to lift at this point.
So Drive By - why does he keep doing the oppsite of all that which you want him to do? Is it him, or you [you of course being the progressive]?
Perhaps he just isn't al that into you all anymore.
Dream on Spanky.
How about the republicans raising your taxes? I haven't heard all the excitment from you righties about the raising taxes on the middle class. Defend the republicans choice to raise your taxes but no new taxes for the rich.
I wonder how much of the republican base wants to kill social security like the party of rich wants to?
Good golly AF - whatever are yu talking about.
What tax bracket do you think I'm in? For god's sake you know that cute little $250k and you are "rich" threshold?
What would you call people that pay that much in taxes each year?
Obama has very graciously cut my taxes. How about yours?
And fret not about killing SS - it's killing itself. It's called self termination.
It is a win for everyone.
The radical treehugger notion that it is the EPA that allows us to breathe, and we would all die immediately from pollution withour the Nanny State agancy is the crisis mentality that allows EPA to radically abuse its authority.
The EPA is an agency out of control.
"radically abuse it's authority", "The EPA is an agency out of control"
jeez Bob
Boobie is not the smart one.
Seen pictures from China lately?
Deep sigh from SoCal as well........................ground level ozone is a BIG deal here and we have made so much progress over the past decades. I truly would like to see figures to convince me this progress has been bad for business...or not....
Mark:
I was born in L.A. I remember choking on the air. I remember my eyes burning on particularly filthy days. I remember the APCD. This is truly terrible news.
For the history-challenged, there are pictures of incredible filth in Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and other major pollution centers from a century ago. We are still choking, but it would be exponentially worse had not regulation of pollution begun in earnest years ago.
To let up now, to relax now is criminal.
But you're still going to vote for Barack, right?
Mark,
One only needs to look at the unemployment rate in California above 12% to know the effect of burdonsome regulation on the manufacturing industrial base in California. Not every business can be a service oriented company. When you start regulating the manufacturing industry out of your state you are going to end up with the unemployment rate you see today and subsequent downturn in the housing market.
JK,
I do not know what these proposed new EPA standards consist of. Maybe they do go too far; I don't know. Postponement of new stardards certainly does not effect those already in place. But in today's political atmosphere "jobs" have become currency. I for one am unwilling to buy reduced enviornmental standards for lower unemployment numbers.
I love LA and California and want to see my state prosper. I do not believe economic and environmental health are mutually exclusive.
Close but Mr. Obama won't be on the ticket. It'll be Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Obama is no longer the smartest brain in the world according to these tools!....lmao
Lean Forward Everyone...(The new American dance...kinda like the Macarena!)
Mark,
I do agree with you that two might not always be mutually exclusive, however, in many instances, established manufacturing firms have a much harder time competing in California than say in Nevada. When a state has restrictions that increase the cost of production for a firm, it puts them at an competitive economic disadvantage. One problem is that a state can't exist just based on one type of industry (say for example, the service industry). A state has to promote its resources and that includes attracting manufacturing firms as well. When you place an increase cost because of environmental regulations on a firm, that makes them uncompetitive for a similiar industry in another part of the country. California always talks a good game about attracting "green" jobs and promoting that business sector, but the reality is that California has no real sustainable green job industry growth.
Well so pandering to the voters isnt bad when its done by Obama but if the GOP candidates pander to voters to win the primary thats really bad. Love the hypocrisy. Why dont you give Obama his due when he deserves it. He should have prevented the EPA from doing an end run around the cap and trade bill that was voted down by democrats and the GOP. This was a huge job killer with minimal if any benefit for the environment. Besides killing at least 100,000 jobs in the coal industry, it would have shifted the remaining 25 cement factories we have left in this country and sent them to China. Do you see the construction industry getting by without cement? I am all for the environment but we have to realize that the US cant unilaterally go back to the stone age while the rest of the world ignores our commitment to something we dont even know the impact of. Whether this was done based on politics and getting reelected or that he really does understand the huge job killing impact of these rules, I am not sure but it was definitely the right thing to do.
Guess what "Kirk", this decision will not increase jobs either, just enhance corporate profits. I hope your happy, a win for the polluters and a loss for the breathers...
But it wont lose them and doesnt enhance profits by one dollar. It prevents companies from shutting down completely. I think polluters vs breathers is a tiny bit of hyperbole dont you think? I thought you guys were all for jobs?
"Kirk" you're a corporatist and that's your prerogative - but don't sit there and tell me it's okay for corporate America to run amok. That already happened to Wall Street and we should just bow to these people because they are the "job creators?" You don't believei n anything that would create some sort of balance in the country - oligarchy rules right? Under these people, there should be no clean air, water, land or taxes. It's all up for grabs and if you don't like it we'll take our jobs to Bangladesh...
Mav, I dont even know what a corporatist is but are you kidding me? Balance as have you seen the government regulatory laws and rules by volume? By state and local jurisdiction? Its interesting you say Bangladesh as India is the only country I know that is more difficult to do business in from a regulatory standpoint than the US. You do realize that clean air, water, land and taxes are all highly regulated dont you? What balance are you talking about? Your balance? Balance that ensures that your point of view is adopted? How is that balance? This isnt about job creators this is about adopting rules that circumvent congress that refused to adopt them and then literally and intentionally put 10% of our coal powered electrical supply out of business. It will literally force all cement factories to be less cost competitive and move to china or someplace less costly. Since that cement is going to be made anyway seems sort of stupid to move the jobs overseas doesnt it to eliminate some EPA emissions that are advocated by a very small "wacko" segment of environmentalists.
The EPA has been a "whipping boy" , not just to Republicans but to moderate Dems such as Joe Manchin; because its radical agenda has killed jobs and wreaked havoc in the private sector.
No one is in favor of pollution, but the arrogant notion that the EPA is "saving children" is the usual liberal worship of the Nanny State
Bob do you even know the definition of the word "radical" or are you just repeating it because you heard Hannity or Limbaugh say it once? Everything can not be radical, if everything is radical it would mean that radical is the normal and then there would be no radical, right Bob.
"arrogant notion"..."liberal worship of the Nanny State"?
Bob, Bob, Bob...you and your fellow travelers (yes, I know that is a term usually reserved for pinko commie liberal f...s like me, but, it works here) would leave corporations to regulate themselves? we should allow them to set the levels of pollution they spew into our environment?
Maybe you want the free market to work on them. When would that work? Before or after the carpet manufacturer in Georgia dumps it's waste in the Ogeechee River? Would the consumer in Seattle know that they are buying from a company that just caused one of the biggest fish kills in the south-east?
sure
Not one Job will be produced. Every single law and regulation that is Killed will simply for the Rich to get Richer and he will not get re-elected letting a Bully Republican Party call the shots.
Keep believing that, June. Dont let reality intrude on your marxism..
I am afraid you are right June, and I for one am convinced that nothing can be changed through our "pay to play" political system, some other tool will have to used to rid this country of the scourge called D.C.
Yeah, tell that to "Kirk"...
no roosevelt in the white house! get rid of gietner!
The Frightening part of this is that if the Republicans actually pull off a win in 2012 based on all lies, this country is headed for the biggest fall in the history of man kind. By 2012 the country will have been reduced to a 3rd World Country because the Republicans plan to sit on the Side Lines, Do absolutely nothing but Bash the President, Do no Work, Take that $176,000 salary we the people pay their familes while Millions of families have no idea where they will get food tomorrow.
By 2012 Our Country will be totally Destroyed because the Republicans Must BUll SH@Tand distract for the next year and a half, ie' do nothing..........................................
Perhaps the Dems need to rethink this and get a Challenger in there..................................
Democratic infighting just what the republicans have been dreaming of.
You really think independents are going to go for Perry and his Army of God? Think that independents are ready for Perry to lead us to the rapture?
The only way for them to even have a chance of winning is to have the supreme court declare Perry the winner without counting the votes.
If only they could get someone out to their to suck the votes off the Democratic side, then maybe they would have a chance for round three, the death to America for the rich by the republicans.
American: Since you know so much, what in the hell makes you believe that Independents will side with the Democrats. To win, Republicans do not need to win all of the Independents just a majority MAYBE.
90% of this country has already made of their minds as to who they will vote for.
10% is confused. 45 D, 45 R.
Or you can make plans to move to a new country.
I am so tired of the disingenuous comments from the oil industry that decisions made in their favor will create jobs. Look at today's jobs reports. Oil industries have no intention of creating jobs if it adds to their bottoms line. I wish Obama would get a spine.
Yeah, it really does show in an "in your face" manner who call the shots in this country, it sure as hell ain't the American citizen.
Hillary 2012
How come only conservatives that have no intention of voting for Hillary are always pushing for discord in the Democratic party?
Is that all you have left?
How come Democrats that have no intention of voting for a Republican are always so concerned with what is going on in teh Republican party??????
Is that all you have period?
Poor Middle got upset. One of these days God will listen to Perry and produce rain on demand, so I can understand your anger until then.
I hope you are not living near the sewer recycle plant that is going to add the recycled water back into the drinking water. They were touting that it was going to make the water taste better. Just think what Perry is doing for Texas he could do for the entire United States.
Perry is trying to pass himself off as presidential material and that is our business.
Spreading discord just for discord sake that is a republican ideal of a fair election. Just like all the slimy tricks they played in Wisconsin. Most of all they want freedom from caring about what is best for our country.
If tax cuts really created jobs, we would be rolling in them. What is the new brilliant answer to our countries problems of jobs why tax cuts of course.
.
One thing you can be sure of, though- No matter what Obama does, it will be wrong. See, all the righties hate more regulations. They say so every day.
Now, go back to the top of the thread and reread, and try to get a feel for how much they approve of this move by Obama.
See what I mean?
Of course you do. And this is why no one is going to take them serriously most of the time.
drive-by I agree, but it also is decisions like these that tamps down the bases enthusiasm, the same base that is going to be required to get out the vote next year, this decision has nothing to do with job creation and it is an insult to frame it as a "job creator", it is just a reminder to all of us that in this country if you have enough money you can write law, doesn't matter if the administration is Republican or Democrat, it also proves that our token vote is irrelevant.
Obama did the right thing. Thank you President Obama for your great wisdom and judgement on this matter. You have made a wise decision.
Buzz and w bush, disappointing news for you two. But you're still going to vote for Barack, right?
Oh, No Drive, like I said above - this is great news, and the absolute right thing to do.
Reading is fundamental. My initial comment was crystal clear. Or are you having a hard time reading through the tears?
"
"Buzz and w bush, disappointing news for you two. But you're still going to vote for Barack, right?"
Not necessarily. Not if a viable, sound, intelligent alternative turns up. One that truly does want to put 'Country First'. But for now, I sure as hell don't see any on the horizon. So, my ansewer is 'maybe yes, maybe no'.
But likely, 'yes'.
Tears of laughter, Spank, as I consider you nitwits thinking we are all suddenly going to abandon Obama for, well, a batch of complete nitwits. NOW, if you can come up with someone without all the Me First constituents as his/her priority.....
That sure rules out Obama.
That's my boy! Barack knew he could count on you Buzz.
Keep your head up Drive By. It'll be hard in the coming months, but someone has to do it.
My god, the speed of Obama's fall is astounding, is it not?
"That sure rules out Obama."
Well, yeah- because YOU say so.
How could I have been so dumb?
I really don't see the majority of us that elected President Obama voting for the likes of Perry. Many didn't vote for McCain because of Palin, but you just keep telling yourself how popular the tea brand has become.
Then you pick Perry, crazier than Palin and you think Independents are going to vote for him.
We are all aware of the disenfranchising of voter rights going on in republican states. The republicans are so sure of the merits of their argument that just in case they are trying to discourage voting as much as possible especially those that might vote against them.
The question not addressed in this article is: does the technology exist to actually meet the proposed EPA ozone regulations? If it does not, then imposing the regulations would penalize business and communities for something beyond their ability to fix. I'm 100% in favor of regulations to make air and water cleaner but this liberal realizes that in this economy, postponing it a year makes sense. My view is because our local publicly-owned water and electric utility has been working diligently to meet the proposed standards and improve their coal-fired process but have stated that they cannot possibly get it done by 2012; they were concerned about the penalties and how that would impact the consumer as well.
Kudos, Jody.
A reasonable liberal...and I thought that was an oxymoron.
The question not addressed in this article is: does the technology exist to actually meet the proposed EPA ozone regulations?
================================================================
I buy no means am an expert on the subject but according to the electric COOP I get electricity from the scrubber technology is available currently to meet the standard, a new coal burning facility they just brought on line is supposed to be incorporating it, as reflected on my monthly bill (ha ha), it's a tough one to call, all that I am sure of is that if corporations are not forced into "clean" technology they will never make the move on their own.
Well put Jody.
Just like President Clinton, President Obama will take flack from both the left and the right for listening to both businesses and Americans.
He's has "brilliantly" outwitted his opposition yet again, by capitulating to their demands...Bravo Mr. President!
From taxes, to the debt ceiling to the date and time of his own speeches, this President just keeps showing the opposition what he's made of...
_______________________________________________________________________________
The audacity of weakness
Another embarrassing fail betrays a White House in a bubble
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/09/01/cenk_obama_boehner/index.html
Okay, by your post the republicans have been getting everything they want. Boner bragged getting 98% of what they wanted from the debt hostage event.
Just how is this failure Obama's fault when he has been doing what the right wants?
So it seems to me that if we are failing it is because we are doing what the right wants.
"Just how is this failure Obama's fault when he has been doing what the right wants?"
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Can someone help this poor soul comprehend the meaning of their own sentence?
I get it, it is President Obama's fault for the bad economy because he is doing what the right wants. The right holds no responsibility for the results from their ideals. They just force them on us and then they can blame Obama when they fail.
A lose/lose for America and the republicans are cheering.
You keep forgetting that a majority of us voted for President Obama and I can't see myself voting for a republican who goal is to destroy social security which seems to be the whole lot running for president this year.
I would never vote for a republican that has signed the pledge with Norquist to the rich before county.
Actually I would never vote for a republican.
Somebody help #3238975 to understand how our system of government works and what the results from the election of 2008 were, because they don't seem to know...
That condescending tone doesn't sound much like a liberal who not only donated money but voted for Obama.
With outward hate and obstructionism I am impressed that Obama has done what he has done. It would have almost been as bad with Hillary as they would have been sexist instead of racist.
Republicans want to make America fail. Why else borrow money to give tax cuts and then start two wars, without raising taxes (never done before in our history) and think the best ideal is to blame social security and medicare by ending them. We already pledged to Norquist before America so you can be assured that we will not raise taxes on the rich.
In republican land you don't live long enough to get to a death panel. Don't worry it is okay, the rich are fine.
b
Look at it this way, the Republicans have to breathe the bad air too. After all, thats what they want, everyone wearing gas masks. There are some days that I wonder why I voted for Pres. Obama instead of Hillary. This is one of them. He really needs to take a leadership role and I know that everything he suggests is turned down, but there has to be a way to outsmart the GOP.
They would be doing the same thing to Hillary. You remember the Clinton's didn't get health care through.
Maybe mute point as the parts that the republicans demanded be put in the new health care is the very ones they are claiming are unconstitutional now.
Maybe Obama doesn't have an end game, but he doesn't strike me as that kind of thinker.
I haven't played much chess, but played a lot of GO an ancient chess like thinking game on a grid board with white and black stones. You have to know where to place your stones and what battles are worth fighting for or you can lose the whole thing.
The first thing you learn is that you cannot control everything without weakening yourself and making your claimed territory very vulnerable. I am thinking our defense department needs to play some GO.
Right now I will just watch to see where this goes, but I know I can't vote for a republican, I love America to much to kill her for the rich.
Some things you can be sure of;
President Hillary would have never done HCR in her first term, President Clinton would have kept her campaign promise and created a jobs plan and infrastructure "bank" right out of the box. She would have retained her majorities in congress. She never would have been foolish enough to believe that she could "trust" the opposition to play nice and would NEVER surrender her core principles to the "fierce urgency of now".
She was ready one DAY ONE.
Some still hope President Obama will be ready...ONE DAY
For some magical reason the republicans wouldn't have been obstructing everything if Hillary was elected. So for someone with so much experience she couldn't out campaign President Obama. But, now she is the answer.
It is not like you would even vote for her if she had of run. Spreading discord is much more important than doing something for our country.
Rich First, Country Last the new republican motto.
For the love of America Obama 2012
I raised funds, and quite a lot for candidate Clinton, and voted for President Obama in the general election. Like many others here you try to label anyone who is disappointed in the President's performance a conservative. This President has been an equal opportunity disappointer, as liberals, a surprising number of conservatives and independents all believed in, and hoped for his success when they voted for him.
This incessant whining and blaming others for the tactical and practical failures of the administration is just indefensible.
The incoming president had 58 democrats in the senate, and a HUGE majority in the house.
He SQUANDERED that advantage by pushing an unpopular (to this day) HCR package, INSTEAD of a JOBS bill and and INFRASTRUCTURE "bank" That was the President's decision. He was elected in the midst of what he calls the "greatest financial crisis since the great depression" and he chose HCR OVER the ECONOMY and used up a huge portion of his political capital pushing it for almost 2 years as the economy continued to stagnate.
Many here have posted a link to prove that this administration has passed more legislation than any since LBJ...You can't have it both ways, either this administration has been obstructed or it has passed what it set out to. Which is it?
It was the president's
The incoming president was able, with their majority to pass just about ANY piece of legislation that they PRIORITIZED. This president's failures are his own.
Don't kid yourself. Progressives are almost as fed up with President Obama as independents are...
Hillary 2012
"I told you so!"
When it walks and talks like a conservative, what is one to think?
Just because it would have been Hillary the repulbicans would have opened their arms and never began the obstructionism that has become the republican calling card. Just say no to America and her people.
You have not told me anything other than you think infighting between the Democrats would be good for our country.
Repeating the same things that have been refuted twice above, and parroting the "obstructionism" canard when it was EXPLAINED to you in detail exactly why that isn't a cogent argument based on the facts they stood in January 2009, makes one wonder if you are capable of anything more. but let's see if you have the intelligence and courage to reply with your answers to the following;
Do you agree that choosing HCR over a jobs and infrastructure plan was a fatal political mistake?
If not explain why.
Do you disagree that this choice by the administration was responsible for the historic losses in the congressional elections of 2010??
If so, explain your reasoning...
Do you think that disagreement with the President makes one a conservative?
Do you think that there was any infighting in the democratic party over HCR?
If yes, does that mean that the President felt that infighting between democrats would be good for the country?
Does that make him a conservative?
Look forward to your thoughts...
Ans still looking...
I think our country desperately needs a health plan. Just 8 years ago I was paying $15 a month for the best insurance. Well it went up and went up and when I left was paying $50 a month for $5000. deductible before it would kick in. People who were paying $60 a month for a family of four are now at $600 a month and for a much less valued insurance. This is all without raises and having our company housing rent raised at the same time.
That kind of climb in insurance rates is unsustainable. People were starting to drop out of the health insurance because they could no longer afford it. I know because I was the one that applied the insurance payments to their accounts taken through payroll. Pretty soon only the rich have health care.
Amazing how everything rolls back to somehow benefiting the rich.
You forget that a new health plan was one of President Obama's campaign promises. The majority was voting for it when we voted for Obama. I am thinking that is why he made it a priority. You voted for him so you would know that.
He only got half of what he wanted for a stimulus. Then half of that was for tax cuts. There went the money that would have created jobs once again obstructed by the republicans who are very stingy except with the rich.
I think it is amazing what he has gotten done in the light of what he started with and the total obstructionism that is the republican party today. It sounds like to me you blame Obama for republican obstruction.
AF-
Note that instead of TELLING you what YOU think, I have ASKED you what you think, above. You failed to answer.
Are you a thinking person? Do you amass facts to reach a conclusion or do you START with a conclusion and select only the facts that support your preconceived notions?
With the same endless riff, you sound like a broken record.
"You forget that a new health plan was one of President Obama's campaign promises."
I don't forget anything...How could you possibly know what anyone else REMEMBERS? That's just silly.
That was ONE of his campaign promises yes, and like all candidates he made many. The President was elected because he promised to "fix": Washington, and fix the economy .The economy was the most important issue facing the country, without question, and jobs. HCR was not. HCR was not polling above 50% back when the battle that cost the democrats the congress and split the party began and a year after passage it still polls below 50%, and that is a fact. Do you REMEMBER the number of DEMOCRATS who were against the bill?
Against It: A Look At The 34 Dems Who Voted No On Health Care Reform
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/who-are-the-democrats-who-opposed-health-care-reform.php
Huge win for President Obama, but split decision for House Democrats
Obama, who had staked his presidency on an all-out push for reform, and who needs the momentum from the win to have any hope of pushing through two other legislative goals this year, financial regulatory reform and new jobs legislation.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34783.html
As stated, the President CHOSE HCR OVER financial reform and JOBS and the economy. That FAILURE, his SUCCESS in promoting the wrong legislation, which passed and was NOT obstructed by ANYONE, is the primary reason why the administration is in the position it is in today. The political choices made by the executive branch.
It wasn't popular then, and it isn't popular now;
38.2% for
51.2% against
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
Other "buzzwords" that sound like they come from one of the talking heads..
"obstructionism" as though it was invented by the republicans in 2009...
"the rich..." You express a prejudice against the rich as a class as though being successful or wealthy is an indictment of malfeasance. That's called BIGOTRY, here's a definition;
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own or intolerant of people of different political views, ethnicity, race, class, religion, profession, sexuality or gender.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot_%28disambiguation%29
"you're saying you blame the president for other people's failings"
I said that I Blame the president fro HIS failings, whereas you blame everyone BUT the President for HIS failings.
So, to sum up;
I blame The President for his mistakes, not obstructionism which you may or may not even understand, as it is a tactic BOTH sides use when in the minority. Were you old enough to follow politics when "W" was President?
Your personal story is touching, but more than 8 in 10 Americans HAD health insurance when this began, so the claim that
"Pretty soon only the rich have health care." is nonsense, and demonstrably so;
16.7% of the population were uninsured in 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States
That's about the percentage of the workforce that is currently unemployed.
You are entitled to your own opinions, and I won't tell you what you should think or believe, but what are they based on?
These are MINE, and I have given you opportunity to see HOW I arrived at some of my conclusions. I hope that you afford others the courtesy you have received here.
AF-
You sound very much like part of the 80% or so of American health care consumers generally satisfied with the quality of the health care they receive, but deeply concerned about the rate of increase of the cost.
For most Americans, I would argue that "health care reform" meant simply measures to ensure that rising costs did not prevent them from keeping the health insurance that most are happy with...and, that President Obama promised them they would, in fact, be able to keep.
President Obama's health care law ended up doing absolutely nothing to rein in the rising costs of health care...no increased competition between providers on a national level; no tort reform to get at the costs associated with the practice of "defensive medicine". Nothing.
Nothing, that is, except the eventual implementation of the 40% excise tax on health care providers offering so called "Cadillac" plans to millions of ordinary Americans; many of whom have actually forfeited wage increases in lieu of superior health care coverage under those same "Cadillac" plans. No wonder the unions screamed bloody murder...forcing the Administration to delay final implementation of this punitive tax that will ultimately degrade the quality of the health care so many union members currently receive.
As far as the Obama stimulus bill goes...the President signed it into law just 28 days after his inauguration. It had been rubber-stamped by the Democrat-controlled Congress. If the President didn't get exactly what he wanted, that's his responsibility. He certainly took full credit for it at the time, didn't he? I'll bet you were trumpeting that achievement at the time as well, weren't you, AF?
Hiya, dangerfield!
" this President just keeps showing the opposition what he's made of..."
I'm an old Ali fan. Remember him? Good boxer. "Wordy" boxer, but a damn good boxer. No- the best boxer. Anyway, old Ali had this deal he called 'rope-a-dope'.
Truly a thing of beauty, it was.
Yep. The greatest.
The world is already ruined!!! This decision won't fix or change that - but maybe it can create jobs for now.
Hey - we Democrats didn't come through in 2010 and left the President to basically fight the GOP/TP by himself...
So if you want to help him...changed the political landscape in 2012 and vote Democratic and then maybe he wouldn't have to make such decisions.
We seem to forget - this is a Democracy and he aint King Obama!!!
TRUTH - not CRAP
Thank you and GOD BLESS AMERICA
Spot on, we let these clowns from the 2010 congress in because we stayed home and it cost us dearly. Lesson learned, if not it will GWB all over again in 2012, he'll just be a brunette...
Democrats didn't stay at home. They got beat...live with it.......
The Constitution provides the right to own property; but it does NOT give the right to damage another's property. The air space over the United States is a common national asset. No company; not even a public utility has the right to introduce harmful airborne pollutants into the air. Additionally, business has no right to pollute waterways.
We have made some serious mistakes along the way in the name of "growth" and now is the time to change that behavior.
Hey Dummy, Please tell me one country that has the enviormental regulations we do. Let it go. We are not going to lose any progress made in our air. Plus, you sir do not have the authority to mandate the air either.
Air pollution from coal-fired power plants:
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, in an average year, a typical coal plant (500 megawatts) generates the following amounts of air pollutants
3.7 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), an amount equivalent to chopping down 161 million trees. CO2 pollution is the principal human cause of global warming and climate change.
10,000 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), which causes acid rain and forms small airborne particles that can cause lung damage, heart disease, and other illnesses.
10,200 tons of nitrogen oxide (NOx), equivalent to half a million late-model cars. NOx leads to formation of smog, which inflames lung tissue and increases susceptibility to respiratory illness.
500 tons of small airborne particles, which can cause bronchitis, reductions in lung function, increased hospital and emergency room admissions, and premature death.
220 tons of hydrocarbons, which contribute to smog formation.
720 tons of carbon monoxide (CO), which causes headaches and places additional stress on people with heart disease.
170 pounds of mercury. 1/70th of a teaspoon of mercury deposited in a 25-acre lake can make the fish unsafe to eat. Mercury also causes learning disabilities, brain damage, and neurological disorders.
225 pounds of arsenic, which leads to cancer in 1 out of 100 people who drink water containing 50 parts per billion.
114 pounds of lead, 4 pounds of cadmium, and other toxic heavy metals. These toxic metals can accumulate in human and animal tissue and cause serious health problems, including mental retardation, developmental disorders, and damage to the nervous system.
why not, who needs breathable air? breathing is overrated anyways.
goddammit Obama.
I think in this case the President did the right thing, these rules were up for reveiw so to let them be implemented now is stupid.
This must be a bitter pill for the left to swallow. But how can you argue that this is where our focus should be, or that this even matters right now. Party aside we have to agree that we have a bigger issue than 108 billion in more regulation.
You know I catch alot of grief from my fellow left but here is just one more reason to agree he is not a good president.
Everybody Have a SAfe and wonderful weekend. God Bless you ALL.