Obama Burns Global Warming Cult

Obama halts EPA air-quality regulations...


President Obama ordered the Environmental Protection Agency Friday to shelve proposed regulations for new air-quality standards, citing the potential impact on the weak economy.

“I have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover,” Mr. Obama said in a statement. “With that in mind, and after careful consideration, I have requested” that EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson “withdraw” the proposed smog standards.

In making the move, Mr. Obama is sticking with air-quality standards set in 2008 by the administration of Republican George W. Bush, which Obama administration officials have said is based on outdated science. A White House official insisted to reporters that killing the more onerous standards was not intended “to endorse the Bush administration’s judgment,” but was done because another mandatory review of the standards is set to take place in 2013, and implementing tougher rules now could create “uncertainty.”

The current Bush ozone standard of 75 parts per billion was set over the objections of EPA scientists. Ms. Jackson has made tightening the regulation a key priority, pushing for the change ahead of the regularly scheduled five-year review in 2013.

But Cass Sunstein, the president’s “czar” in charge of regulatory review, told Ms. Jackson in a letter Friday that Mr. Obama was rejecting her proposal for more restrictive standards.

The new regulations on ozone ambient air quality standards would have cost the U.S. businesses anywhere from $19 billion to $90 billion per year to comply with, a figure mentioned by the president earlier this week in a letter to Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican. Congressional Republicans and industry leaders have been sparring with the administration over the increasing cost of government regulations, arguing that the burden is preventing firms from hiring more workers...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/2/obama-halts-epas-proposed-air-quality-regs/

 

Boy the Global Warming Cultsters really are taking it on the chin these days. Eating their own now.

 

Seems pretty sad. I rather enjoy breathing.

Here's the thing, though: why is it always assumed that it's bad for the economy to have good pollution standards? For one thing, people will be healthier and that's good for the economy. For another thing, while some businesses will have to spend money to comply with those regulations, other businesses will make money thereby. Overall, it seems like those regulations should be good for the economy.

I'm disappointed in Obama for sacrificing the good of the country for some political points.

 

What an empty-headed statement. You've breathed fine to this point, have you not?

Holy sheet! The EPA has been in existence since 1970! Are you telling me that they haven't gotten around to assuring "good pollution standards" until now, and Obama just jammed a wooden stake into any chance of having any?

Seriously. Get a clue.

Whoa! Well: we should pass laws that do not allow ANY company to expel ANY pollution! Because people will be healthier even STILL! And that will be even better for the economy!

These Obama EPA mandates don't go far enough! When - oh when - will we finally have GOOD pollution standards!!!!

Because I like to breathe! It's for the kiiiiiiidddddssss.

I suggest we follow the same strategy with your posts. You pay me money to proofread and ideologically correct your posts. That way, we won't have as much pollution on this site, other people will make money, and - as such - it will be good for economy, and we'll all benefit!!!



You have to be in favor of that, right? If you don't, you hate the economy, and you want people's kids to starve.

Yeah. Let's see if you're in favor of practicing what you've preached here, considering your wanton pollution of this forum.

 

Where I live, the air and water are clean and clear. That is, I moved out of the city and into the country. Sure we need more regulation but that is a can of worms that applies to the 15% of Americans who choose to live in the city... I am with the other 85%.

 

We do not need 'more regulation'. We need to scrutinize the myriad asinine regulations we have at present, and clean house.

 

I think the more approiate take on this would have been:

Obama keeps current air quality regulations as opposed to more stringent ones.

He did not really halt regulating air quality.

 

But in order to avoid my pollution all you have to do is not read my posts. Not breathing, much more complicated.

 

Most unemployed would burn tires and arsnic all day long to have a job to feed their family.

Who gives a (*)(*)(*)(*) if the temp goes up .00000000111111 a degree 100 years from now, people want jobs.

 

I trust - with you not breathing and all - that we can look forward to posts of equivalent intelligence?

 

I'll try very hard. But no promises.

 

I won't hold my breath.

 

... unless we never do anything about air quality standards, in which case you'll have to.

 

You are very correct, Libocalypsenow.

NASA too has recently driven another nail in the coffin of the "Global Warming Alarmists".

 

EPA regulations on ozone relate to public health, not AGW.

 

I'm pretty sure people enjoy having their jobs as well.

 

You unfortunately missed my point.

Policies to strictly control Ozone and AWG at the expense of American jobs are each advanced the “Global Alarmists” and members of the radical Left.



If only the liberals in this group would get this angry over being duped and misled by the evangelists and profiteers of the great global warming hoax! ... The undeniable proof of global warming ... Albert Gore style. GORE: "In terms of the hot water bubbling up in some places, but two kilometers or so down in most places there are these incredibly hot rocks, 'cause the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot." ... Gosh, Mr. Gore, If the earth were indeed this hot, we would be a star! (Photo source: Associated Press)

 

odrama's statement shows that he believes in getting reelected much more than he believes in air quality or global warming.
It is a 'move to the center' ploy, NOTHING ELSE. odrama is only transparent when he doesn't want to be. Except to the terminally gullible obamalamaloopas, of course.

 

That is correct. And in 2013, increasing the standards will be reviewed again.

 

Not by odrama, he'll be a junior janitor in the Chicago City Hall. Junior, as its a union job after all, and seniority is everything..

Sorry, that probably was demeaning.


He'll be an apprentice building maintenance and environmental standards technician.

 

i suppose we can count on these little day trips into responsible leadership up until election day and each will be accompanied by the denunciation of conservatives and the tea party as the cause of swerving us from the holy crusade of obamanites everywhere. it's mildly reminiscent of our pulling out of viet nam prior to nixon's re-election and many other last ditch attempts to garner support for the second term of a president who's star is quickly fading.

 

I do say that economic policies > environmental policies for the most part, however..

Thing is, I didn't sign up anywhere to have the air that I breathe polluted. Not anywhere.

Look at China. Look at THEIR air quality, in the heavily industrialized cities, and then you tell me that this air is good enough to breathe. Tell me you'd be satisfied by the air quality in some of China's most factory-populated cities.

According to libertarianism, wouldn't pumping massive amounts of gunk into the air that people breathe, against said peoples' will, be violating their rights? To life/liberty, specifically? (My health is part of my rights to life; making me unhealthy against my will by pumping tons of gunk into the air I breathe is violating my rights to life, and my liberty).

And yet, most self-proclaimed libertarians have zero problem with this huge right wing agenda of big wig industrialization and big huge greedy corporatism. Why is that?

Look, if you're pro-industrial capitalism and pro-big business, just say so. It's fine if you admit to it.

But one thing you should NEVER do, is then say you're in support of peoples' liberty, if you are said ideology. It's not liberty to be a big-wig capitalist economic tyrant environmental hazard, ever. Not ever.

 

Don't celebrate yet.

He gets the regs ramped up X x 3 and then cuts them X x 1

That way he claims to do us a favor when in fact he didn't.

He gets what he wants and looks good too. Cake-eater-

He did that with growing the govt and then claiming to scale it back. Regs are the same.

 

Not that I support aggressive regulation of it, but it's pure simple minded retardation to think that human massively-CO2-producing activity can't help cause global warming.

 

if you read the fine print,the regulations are going to be considered in 2013.If Obozo is re-elected,hes going to slap these regulations on us since the election is over.He may backdoor them as well.I dont trust his word one bit.I believe he knows also they had no chance in hell getting past the GOP Congress.I dont trust this man one bit after bypassing Congress to implement parts of the DREAM Act.