Looking forward to reducing the power of the EPA

[Mott the Hoople]

Oh God, do you RonTards and Lyndon Larouch-ettes ever tire of this nonsensical hyperbole?

Listen man, the environment doesn’t recognize state boundaries. Air, water, and wildlife do not feel compelled to stop at the border of Kansas. The Grand Canyon’s air gets fucked up by pollution from southern California. Vermont’s lakes used to be degraded by acid rain originating in Ohio. That's why RonTards literally look retarded when they whine about "states rights", especially where the environment is concerned.

Federal environmental law and the EPA establish certain national baselines and minimums of environmental quality. It’s up to the States to the implement their own programs to meet those minimum standards, or to adopt their own laws that provide an equivalent, or higher degree of environmental protection.

If your state is too lazy to adopt it’s own regulatory programs and laws that meet certain minimum standards, that’s your states fault. USEPA typically only steps in when a State is too lazy to meet certain baseline environmental performance metrics. I can’t speak for your state, but in my state the vast majority of environmental performance and quality is implemented and legislated by the state and it’s agencies.

Very well stated. That is exactly correct.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

so EVERYTHING is a pollutant. got it.

No, you obviously don't get it. ANYTHING can be a pollutant when it is present in such a form or quantity that is harmful to life and/or the ecosystem. You need 19 to 21% Oxygen in the air you breath to live but if oxygen levels rose 25% you would suffer serious health consequences and if it rose to 40% you would die, so much above that 21% level oxygen would be a pollutant.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Funny, but when Whitman was pulling all types of questionable tactics under the Shrub, jokers like you were willing to take a bullet for her. Now that the industrial corporations are going to made to actually clean up their act AND pay for it without screwing the public, jokers like you are once again acting against your best interest in some misguided act of loyalty. Sad.

You must be thinking of someone else. Whitman was forced to resign by the Bush administration for actually enforcing environmental laws.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Are you seriously trying to align your original contention with what they are saying, because that bridge just doesn't exist.

Got news for you, there are papers and essays by professionals, great minds, experts, etc., that I'm sure YOU disagree with. I've already given my comments and responses. You don't have to like or agree with them, but so far you can't logically disprove them.

it's alot more substantial to align my original contention using documents from the framers as well as those directly involved within the first decade of ratification than for you to disprove those documents with scholars 100+ years after.

And yet beyond supposition and conjecture you cannot logically or factually prove your original assertions and contentions by tryingto parallel them with the quote that you gave or the names you drop.

Like I said, your stubborn insistence is just that, and you're entitled to it.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Funny, but when Whitman was pulling all types of questionable tactics under the Shrub, jokers like you were willing to take a bullet for her. Now that the industrial corporations are going to made to actually clean up their act AND pay for it without screwing the public, jokers like you are once again acting against your best interest in some misguided act of loyalty. Sad.

You must be thinking of someone else. Whitman was forced to resign by the Bush administration for actually enforcing environmental laws.

err, not quite. Here's a little background, which was topped off with that wonderful declaration that all was well at Ground Zero in New York City.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Christine_Todd_Whitman

 

[Damocles]

deleted, banned.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

deleted, banned.

Interesting point. Well stated.