Obama administration unveils controversial emissions cap on power plants

[billvon 3,121]

>the EPA is full of ideological political hacks

Given what they've accomplished in the last 40 years - they are quite a bit more than that. You and your kids will live longer, healthier lives because of them.

[rhaig 0]

billvon

Now, if Congress has changed its mind they are free to pass a new law changing how the Clean Air Act works.

And you know, if that's how laws changed under this administration, I'd be ok with that. But on more than one occasion we've seen our President declare that certain laws won't be enforced, or changing (through policy redefinition) the enforcement parameters of laws.

It is not ok for this president to do it, and it is not ok for any other president to do it.

--
Rob

[rhaig 0]

grue

But hey, atoms are scary.

don't trust them.

They make up everything.

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

***Now, if Congress has changed its mind they are free to pass a new law changing how the Clean Air Act works.

And you know, if that's how laws changed under this administration, I'd be ok with that. But on more than one occasion we've seen our President declare that certain laws won't be enforced, or changing (through policy redefinition) the enforcement parameters of laws.

It is not ok for this president to do it, and it is not ok for any other president to do it.

OK, but THIS president is a mere piker compared with Reagan or GWB in this regard. Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it. But the whining is incessant when the brown guy does it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[grue 1]

rhaig

***
But hey, atoms are scary.

don't trust them.

They make up everything.

cavete terrae.

[rhaig 0]

kallend

******Now, if Congress has changed its mind they are free to pass a new law changing how the Clean Air Act works.

And you know, if that's how laws changed under this administration, I'd be ok with that. But on more than one occasion we've seen our President declare that certain laws won't be enforced, or changing (through policy redefinition) the enforcement parameters of laws.

It is not ok for this president to do it, and it is not ok for any other president to do it.

OK, but THIS president is a mere piker compared with Reagan or GWB in this regard. Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it. But the whining is incessant when the brown guy does it.

You're justifying the wrongdoings of our president based on the same actions of prior presidents.

You are taking the exact same action you are complaining about from those on the right when previous presidents violated their oath. You're not complaining about the president you support when they take actions against their oath.

Classic definition of two wrongs don't make a right.

It's not OK now, it wasn't then. Don't pretend like it's OK now just because someone else didn't complain when it wasn't OK before.

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

*********Now, if Congress has changed its mind they are free to pass a new law changing how the Clean Air Act works.

And you know, if that's how laws changed under this administration, I'd be ok with that. But on more than one occasion we've seen our President declare that certain laws won't be enforced, or changing (through policy redefinition) the enforcement parameters of laws.

It is not ok for this president to do it, and it is not ok for any other president to do it.

OK, but THIS president is a mere piker compared with Reagan or GWB in this regard. Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it. But the whining is incessant when the brown guy does it.

You're justifying the wrongdoings of our president based on the same actions of prior presidents.

You are taking the exact same action you are complaining about from those on the right when previous presidents violated their oath. You're not complaining about the president you support when they take actions against their oath.

Classic definition of two wrongs don't make a right.

It's not OK now, it wasn't then. Don't pretend like it's OK now just because someone else didn't complain when it wasn't OK before.

STRAWMAN!

Where did I say it was OK?

All I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of the ODS sufferers.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

kallend

***
You are taking the exact same action you are complaining about from those on the right when previous presidents violated their oath. You're not complaining about the president you support when they take actions against their oath.

STRAWMAN!

Where did I say it was OK?

All I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of the ODS sufferers.

this is where you would typically assert lack of reading comprehension for the person you are replying to.

You complain about lack of action: "Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it." But then you make no complaints when our president does the same thing.

You are taking the action you complain about. (the inaction)

The closest I come to implying your compliance with the situation is "Don't pretend like it's OK now just because someone else didn't complain when it wasn't OK before."

That statement does not state an action or opinion on your part. It is an imperative not to take an action.

Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to my post. I simply pointed out that you are taking the same action you complain about.

Can you not see that you are acting just like those "ODS sufferers"??

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

******
You are taking the exact same action you are complaining about from those on the right when previous presidents violated their oath. You're not complaining about the president you support when they take actions against their oath.

STRAWMAN!

Where did I say it was OK?

All I'm doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of the ODS sufferers.

this is where you would typically assert lack of reading comprehension for the person you are replying to.

You complain about lack of action: "Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it." But then you make no complaints when our president does the same thing.

You are taking the action you complain about. (the inaction)

The closest I come to implying your compliance with the situation is "Don't pretend like it's OK now just because someone else didn't complain when it wasn't OK before."

That statement does not state an action or opinion on your part. It is an imperative not to take an action.

Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to my post. I simply pointed out that you are taking the same action you complain about.

Can you not see that you are acting just like those "ODS sufferers"??

You're on a STRAWMAN roll right now.

Doesn't help your credibility.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

If you can't see it, it's because you don't want to. You aren't looking at facts.

Keep letting your TAs teach your sections. "Your" students will thank you.


But hey... have a nice weekend (what's left of it).

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

Keep letting your TAs teach your sections. "Your" students will thank you.


.

Resorting to PAs shows that you know that all you have is a strawman.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

so are you going to complain about Obama sidestepping process and congress, or are you going to keep taking the same inaction that you complain about?

Or option 3, type strawman in all caps like a freshman who just got their email account in 1989?

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

so are you going to complain about Obama sidestepping process and congress, or are you going to keep taking the same inaction that you complain about?

Or option 3, type strawman in all caps like a freshman who just got their email account in 1989?

Please cite the post in which I complained about inaction.

Looks like yet another strawman to me, combined with another PA.

Reading back through the thread, the only complaints I've made are about right wing hypocrisy and your repeated strawman arguments.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

***

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4641987#4641987

"Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it. "

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

***

Please cite the post in which I complained about inaction.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4641987#4641987

"Yet I heard few or no complaints from the right when GWB or Reagan did it. "


Nice cut and paste to omit the context. That is a factual observation concerning the complaints of others and hypocrisy of the right in whining about Obama's signing statements but not whining about Reagan's or Bush's far greater numbers.



I think that makes four strawmen in a row for you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

blah blah blah...

how many posts do you make every day where you avoid any answer to a question?

You're just stirring shit, I thought I'd point out your inconsistency. Everyone else can see it.

Your weather looks nice today. Go enjoy it. Have a nice day. I've got the clouds you had yesterday, but it'll keep the heat down. Perhaps I can get out and enjoy the day after all.

--
Rob

[kallend 2,156]

rhaig

blah blah blah...

how many posts do you make every day where you avoid any answer to a question?

You're just stirring shit, I thought I'd point out your inconsistency. Everyone else can see it.

The ONLY inconsistency in this thread is right wing whining about signing statements from the brown guy in the White House while giving a pass to signing statements from Reagan and Bush Jr.

How many strawmen can you create in one day?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Amazon 7]

kallend

***blah blah blah...

how many posts do you make every day where you avoid any answer to a question?

You're just stirring shit, I thought I'd point out your inconsistency. Everyone else can see it.

The ONLY inconsistency in this thread is right wing whining about signing statements from the brown guy in the White House while giving a pass to signing statements from Reagan and Bush Jr.

How many strawmen can you create in one day?

I just hope all the strawmen are dressed well... we do not need strawmen with no clothes.

[rushmc 23]

Amazon

******blah blah blah...

how many posts do you make every day where you avoid any answer to a question?

You're just stirring shit, I thought I'd point out your inconsistency. Everyone else can see it.

The ONLY inconsistency in this thread is right wing whining about signing statements from the brown guy in the White House while giving a pass to signing statements from Reagan and Bush Jr.

How many strawmen can you create in one day?

I just hope all the strawmen are dressed well... we do not need strawmen with no clothes.



They can join your emperor, who has none

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

rushmc

*********blah blah blah...

how many posts do you make every day where you avoid any answer to a question?

You're just stirring shit, I thought I'd point out your inconsistency. Everyone else can see it.

The ONLY inconsistency in this thread is right wing whining about signing statements from the brown guy in the White House while giving a pass to signing statements from Reagan and Bush Jr.

How many strawmen can you create in one day?

I just hope all the strawmen are dressed well... we do not need strawmen with no clothes.



They can join your emperor, who has none

Are you looking at that sort of thing again??

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>the EPA is full of ideological political hacks

Given what they've accomplished in the last 40 years - they are quite a bit more than that. You and your kids will live longer, healthier lives because of them.

If you were not referencing a lie you might have a point

Quote

The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Quote

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data.

Quote

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

rushmc

***>the EPA is full of ideological political hacks

Given what they've accomplished in the last 40 years - they are quite a bit more than that. You and your kids will live longer, healthier lives because of them.

If you were not referencing a lie you might have a point

Quote

The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Quote

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data.

Quote

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

What do they require you to do with those missives that come from management after you share the portion that is allowed for public dissemination?

[rushmc 23]

Amazon

******>the EPA is full of ideological political hacks

Given what they've accomplished in the last 40 years - they are quite a bit more than that. You and your kids will live longer, healthier lives because of them.

If you were not referencing a lie you might have a point

Quote

The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Quote

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data.

Quote

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

What do they require you to do with those missives that come from management after you share the portion that is allowed for public dissemination?

You support lying
You show it here every day (nearly)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 900]

Maybe

"Bailiff, whack his pee-pee!"

[Amazon 7]

rushmc

*********>the EPA is full of ideological political hacks

Given what they've accomplished in the last 40 years - they are quite a bit more than that. You and your kids will live longer, healthier lives because of them.

If you were not referencing a lie you might have a point

Quote

The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Quote

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data.

Quote

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

What do they require you to do with those missives that come from management after you share the portion that is allowed for public dissemination?

You support lying
You show it here every day (nearly)

Shall we go back and find all the CHICKENHAWK posts supporting W's Excellent Adventure????
Seriously that is like calling the little copper tea pot on a gas stove black as opposed to your 20 gallon Iron Stewpot sitting in a Birchwood fire.