3
   

So Farmerman....Your Opinion Please

 
 
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 06:38 am
So,are the new regulations he's pushing through concerning the environment reasonable or is he being as big business scumbag puppet right to the end?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 1,231 • Replies: 10
No top replies

 
farmerman
 
  0  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 07:05 am
Why ask me? Ive alrady gone on record in these threads to vilify the Bush administration for its "denutting" major health and environmental law just to satisfy a small group of industrial constituents. There is no scientific evidence to support any of these environmnetal law busting regs and whats most cynical is that its gonna take a long ******* time to get the correct regs back on the book.

Other areas have included

Knocking off the air emissions lvels for new power plants (bought and paid for by DUKE POWER).

Reregulating air toxics (b&pf by mining, power and chem manufacturers)

Denutting the endangered species act-I have no friggin idea what was in their mind other than to remove all controls on irresponsible development.

reregulating ARsenic (a known carcinogen) to higher standards (Bush's own EPA director Chritie Todd WHitman quit over this issue years ago) Now they wanna make it easier to poison us



Bush is actually turning out to be fuckin evil. Hes been at the controls of an oligarchy and he sees that he better stay the levels of environmental degredation so Obama isnt too successful.


I was a kid in SChool when the Cuyahoga River used to catch fire just before Nixon organized an EPA. Im not sure what Bush wants to do since environmental engineering and products development is actually GOOD FOR BUSINESS. WHys he turning 40 years o progress on its ear?


If I ever see Bush in his retirement and I have a chance, Im gonna hock a loogie on that man, hes a goddam disgrace to our entire planet.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 07:07 am
Now, all the dipshits like Ceej and Water boy will be lining up with attempts at some cobbled up logic to put a spin on what Bush is doing. (Maybe not Ceej cause hes not bright enough)
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 08:11 am
@farmerman,
I asked you because you're knowledgable in these areas and generally fair minded about scientific opinion.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 08:19 am
Bush is hurrying to make as many policy and rule changes as possible while he's a lame duck. It's something every President does before he leaves office. In the case of Baby Bush, he want s to suck as much corporate dick as he can before he gets evicted.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 09:40 am
@Setanta,
Whats even more insidious is that the "overturn" mechanisms dont affect those Presidential rule changes that were in the hopper for some specified period. Clintons were just normal end of term policy changes and were quickly swept away. Bush had his evil minions working on these for over a year it seems that they were developed to be" overturn proof".
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 10:46 am
They can be overturned, it just won't be quick or easy. Yes, certainly one can be assured that greater minds than that possessed by the Baby Bush is behind this.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 10:56 am
It might help if Obama's new Solicitor General looks for ways to challenge these executive orders on a legal basis. That would require industry to tip their hands by opposing administration actions after Baby Bush is gone.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 04:48 pm
@Bi-Polar Bear,
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
The rule, which has strong support from business groups, says that in assessing the risk from a particular substance, federal agencies should gather and analyze “industry-by-industry evidence” of employees’ exposure to it during their working lives. The proposal would, in many cases, add a step to the lengthy process of developing standards to protect workers’ health.


Not sure what this means. If the plan is to track each individual's exposure to something over their entire working lives, industries with high turnover are going to be facing enormous costs, with possibly no benefit to anyone. I'm not even sure how it could be done.

Sounds like something that should be deferred to the next administration, all right, but it doesn't sound like something that should be accepted or rejected out of hand.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 05:28 pm
@Setanta,
Aware that overturning will be possible, but the probability will require diversion of Congressional resources and /or even court challenges by potential plaintiffs. The rule re: reducing air quality standards for lands adjoining nat parks is one that is a pile of cynical rubbish.

We dont need no more studies to determine that benzene or arsenic or beryllium are dangerous and sometime scancer causing. These reg changes are gonna take up a2 year period of time minimum. BASTARDS.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Nov, 2008 09:36 pm
And, of course, the point is that Baby Bush's asshole buddies in Corporate America can continue to poison the environs of places where they do not personally live, in order to maximize their profits, and the people be damned.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » So Farmerman....Your Opinion Please
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/29/2024 at 10:58:42