Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Sunday, August 28, 2011

EPA

Michele Bachmann has announced that she intends to shut down the EPA in a single stroke. In fact, she treated that as an applause line. Yet according to the polls I've seen, most voters strongly favor keeping the EPA. Are Republicans so confident of victory that they feel they can espouse deeply unpopular views? I must confess that the attitude of Bachmann and her cohorts -- "I don't give a shit what folks think" -- has me spooked.
Comments:
They know nothing matters anymore so she says what the crowd of the day wants to hear. She knows there will be no fallout. She doesn't believe anything at all.
 
Oh come on. It's high time that we got rid of that totalitarian over-regulating thing! Ever since that potsmoking treehugging Bolshie POTUS-37 started the EPA its been nothing but banana peels and kumbaya while killing American business and keeping the job-creators in shackles. Should have kicked him out when he was caught in a bathroom stall with Roy Cohn and Alger Hiss...

Kill the EPA! Pittsburgh no longer looks like it did in the 70s. It's been 40 odd years since the Cuyahoga River's been on fire. Where the heck am I supposed to roast my marshmellows??

You think she's crazy? Does a crazy lady say; "I don't want the United States to be in a global economy where our economic future is bound to that of Zimbabwe?" Does that sound crazy to you??
 
Again, with the boogie(wo)man. Has fear-mongering seeped into our national psyche? This is nothing new. Bush personified this attitude *as president.* After he "won" he outright told everyone else to "get over it" because he didn't give a crap what the other side thought or felt, whether they were in the majority or not, and regardless of the fact that all Americans were his constituents.

Far more concerning are things like our *current* president who not only kept Bush's Faith-based Office but codified it into permanence by integrating it into HHR....to zero discussion or fallout.

We don't need yet another outlet advising us to dive under our school-desks over Boogiegal Bachmann... we're going to be bombarded with that everywhere, as an unhealthy incentive to vote for the Trojan Ass in the White House, who continues to implement Bush-Cheney's wildest wetdreams with barely any notice, let alone outrage.
 
Nature abhors a vacuum so it's easy to fill republican voters heads with such nonsense. If we had a real Liberal party instead of Democrats much of this horse shit would have been dealt with years ago. eg: Nancy Pelosi keeping her powder dry or "Impeachment is off the table."

Belief in the Illuminati and that Obama will bring change are opposite sides of the same coin.
 
If people like Michelle had always been in power, we would all be dead from DDT.
 
Something for Americans to think about before deciding not to vote for Obama in 2012:

Even just four years of drinking seriously contaminated water could kill you.
 
"Are Republicans so confident of victory that they feel they can espouse deeply unpopular views?"


It's looking more and more as though they really don't want to win in 2012. If they did they'd be pushing Huntsman forward more. I suspect they'll happily go along with another 4 years of Obama conservatism - which must surely suite their requirements, in spite of their whinings. They'll then feel sure of a win in 2016 - via the swinging pendulum syndrome.
 
Hey, I know this is terribly off-topic.But:
What do " all American presidents since Harry Truman" (-> http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2002/06/12964.shtml)
AND Quadaffi have in common ?
Short answer is : Kroll O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt -> http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,druck-782933,00.html(Third paragraf, one of their armoured trucks standing at crime-scene of massacre at main stronghold)
 
I'm convinced that neither party [the leadership] gives a shit about what we think. The fix is in: the neoliberal/libertarian plan is ontrack and will not be diverted. Short of a miracle.

Whether we're ruled by the oil companies/extractors or the Wall St. companies/extractors, the result is the same.

They win. We lose.

Not pretty!

Peggy Sue

PS: which is why I will vote for neither legacy party.
 
If you think about it why do Reps. want to be in the white house. They have some one who is doing their bidding without the blame. He did it in his first term when he needed the democrats to vote for him for his second term, just imagine what he would do if he is in office when there is no 3rd term. That is the only explanation for the republicans field these days
 
@twilight...Huntsman? Seriously? Yet another magic underwear Mormon freak? Hardly a sober choice for the rethuglicans.

@Jotman...fearmongering from Thailand? GFY.

@Mr. Mike...thanks for keeping it sane.
 
prowlerzee ~~ Huntsman seems to be a well-balanced guy, slightly left of Obama, doesn't flaunt his religion, has no connection to the Dominionists.......yeah, I agree, why would the Republicans want to push him forward? :-)
 
Ad hominem attacks seem out of place here. Because the question raised in the post is serious, I will continue to confine my remarks the topic at hand.

The inevitable consequence of a Tea-Party president will be that existing laws and regulations won't be adequately enforced. This isn't that speculative. I'm thinking about what we saw under Bush with respect to the EPA in particular.

I said four years of drinking contaminated water could kill you. But for practical purposes, the duration to consider is twelve years. By 2016 many Americans could be living in a country where for 12 of the past 16 years, regulations protecting the air and water haven't been enforced. I suspect much of the damage the Bush administration inflicted on the environment has yet to be publicized, let alone addressed. For example, country is just awakening to the consequences of unregulated fracking.

Whether a Tea Party president would pose a serious threat to your health will depend on mainly on where you live. The absence of a functional EPA in California or Vermont is probably not as critical as in some other states.

Some of the potential consequences of a Tea Party White House are quite speculative, but not the environmental impact. Also, this kind of damage may be hardest to undo, supposing it can be undone at all.
 
"Are Republicans so confident of victory that they feel they can espouse deeply unpopular views?"

Or perhaps they are just mentality unbalanced? Or that they know the MSM will never really take them to task for it, and that the Progs are too busy firing off at the President and the Democrats.

"I must confess that the attitude of Bachmann and her cohorts -- "I don't give a shit what folks think" -- has me spooked."

Well, it's scared the s**t out of me, to be honest. Then again, all of the Repub candidates engender that same emotion in me--cold fear.
 
I think they should still keep the EPA. Although I hope they organize their rules and regulations.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind