Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

EPA Denies Playing Politics

Was publication of carbon rules delayed for an election year?

January 17, 2014

WASHINGTON (AP) — The head of the Environmental Protection Agency denied Thursday that the agency delayed formal publication of carbon pollution rules for new power plants for political reasons, as......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(38)

CherokeeProud

Jan-19-14 12:13 AM

@Chokingdopey:The EPA,IRS,DOJ, and Obama are all completely wrong just like you! Obama wants to kill coal, Holder is is a liar and Clinton is a liar. Well, excuse me, I forgot Sebilius and Rice. Your figures, where did you get them? Did you call Obozo for them? You make no sense at all. And also why your remark: Is Nutting Sacred? OINK! If we wanted left wing lug nut democrap news all the time, we would have him hire you. Is ChokingDopey a jackazz? HeHaw HeHaw!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-18-14 6:56 PM

Hey ChokingOinker, let us know when you meet a "real researcher." Derrrr.....

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-18-14 3:03 PM

ChokingStalker “My favorite observation about TrollSlayer/dawraith is that he has recently picked up such an intelligent vocabulary.”

What a nice thing to say, Choker. Returning the compliment, my favorite observation about ChokingStalker/ParasiticPig is that he oinks louder than Sir Randall Reid Smith singing Country Roads at an Adena artifact museum housecleaning party.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-18-14 5:01 AM

(CNSNews****) -- When asked whether he read the entire 1,582-page, $1.1-trillion government spending bill before he voted for it yesterday, Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.) said he would “not dignify that question with an answer.”

On Capitol Hill on Thursday, CNSNews**** asked Connolly: “Did you read all 1,582 pages of the bill?”

Connolly said: “I’m not going to dignify that question with an answer.”

The Dems are INSULTED that a SURF would ask the ruling class if they read the bill that STEALS $1.1 TRILLION of your hard earned tax dollars!!!

Well EXCUUUUUUUUUUUSE MEEEE!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-18-14 4:58 AM

(CNSNews****) -- When asked whether he read the 1,528-page, $1.1 trillion government spending bill before he voted for it yesterday, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said, “Nobody did!”

On Capitol Hill on Thursday, CNSNews**** asked Blumenauer: “The omnibus bill yesterday, it was 1,582 pages, did you have a chance to read all the pages before voting on it?”

Blumenauer laughed and said: “Nobody did!”

“Nobody did?” said the CNSNews**** reporter.

“Nope,” said Blumenauer.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-18-14 4:47 AM

It's so effin cold in the OV I'm surprised that a Parasite Pig can even manage 1 oink without freezing its lipstick covered lips together!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-18-14 1:31 AM

RockE, the Oinking Choker here is a big proponent of your anthropogenic climate change theory. That should tell you something... LOL

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Jan-17-14 11:28 PM

The premise of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan is that there is an overwhelming judgment of science that anthropogenic global warming is already producing devastating impacts, which is summarized by this statement from the President’s Second Inaugural Address

This premise is not strongly supported by the scientific evidence:

Testimony of Judith Curry - a climate scientist.

Translation: Curry said the President is full of it.. (in a polite way).

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Jan-17-14 11:23 PM

Climate change (regardless of whether the primary cause is NATURAL OR ANTHROPOGENIC may be less important in driving vulnerability in most regions than increasing population, land use practices, and ecosystem degradation. Regions that find solutions to current problems of climate variability and extreme weather events and address challenges associated with an increasing population are likely to be well prepared to cope with any additional stresses from climate change. (Testimony of Judith Curry, a climate scientist)

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Jan-17-14 11:17 PM

...the premise of dangerous anthropogenic climate change is the foundation for a farreaching plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce vulnerability to extreme weather events. Elements of this Plan may be argued as important for associated energy policy reasons, economics, and/or public health and safety. However, claiming an overwhelming scientific justification for the Plan based upon anthropogenic global warming does a disservice both to climate science and to the policy process. (Testimony of Judith Curry - a climate scientist)

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 11:04 PM

Tell us, RockeRetardo, the Sage of SouthWheeling, Moundsville Mensa wannebe Self proclaimed Brainiac of Benwood, the Stale Prince of Bellaire, etc. etc.:

This BULLS*** your liberal talking points that "Bush put the wars on a credit card" where the ***k did the debt go??

It counts against the National Debt, dumbass it does NOT go into space.

HOWEVER, you broMance Buddy Barry the Brainless did BORROW $ 4 TRILLION and THAT SHOWS up NOWHERE: Quantitative Easing!!

At $85 BILLION per month that is just PRINTING BOGUS BILLS which sooner or later catch up with dimwits like RockeRetarded when he spends $10 a gallon for gasoline to go pick up Colt 45 malt liquors at the Liquor Store.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Jan-17-14 11:01 PM

The premise of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan is that there is an overwhelming judgment of science that anthropogenic global warming is already producing devastating impacts, which is summarized by this statement from the President’s Second Inaugural Address: Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms. This premise is not strongly supported by the scientific evidence: • the science of climate change is not settled, and evidence reported by the IPCC AR5 weakens the case for human factors dominating climate change in the 20th and early 21st centuries • with the 15+ year hiatus in global warming, there is growing appreciation for the importance of natural climate variability • the IPCC AR5 and SREX find little evidence that supports an increase in most extreme weather events that can be attributed to humans..

Testimony of Judith Curry (a climate scientist

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 10:56 PM

LaughableReputation, what part of the myth of the "Clinton Surplus" don't you understand. Budget deficits under Clinton: (Treasury dot gov)

1994 $281.26 Billion

1995 $281.23 Billion

1996 $250.83 Billion

1997 $188.34 Billion

1998 $113.05 Billion

1999 $130.08 Billion

2000 $17.91 Billion

2001 $133.29 Billion

As can clearly be seen, in no year did the national debt go down, nor did Clinton leave President Bush with a surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a deficit.

Yes, the deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 (ending in September 2000 with a deficit of "only" $17.9 billion), but it never reached zero--let alone a positive surplus number.

And Clinton's last budget proposal for FY2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit.

The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration.

Bush inherited a RECESSION.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Jan-17-14 10:28 PM

To RockEReputation etal: The facts aren't on your side.

A quote from someone with much more credibility: "Howard Herzog, Senior Research Engineer With The Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative: “It’s not a mature industry [CCS].” (Javier E. David, “Carbon technology comes with big questions—and costs,” CNBC, 9/24/13)

Herzog: “It’s always going to be cheaper to put the CO2 in the atmosphere than to store it.… Unfortunately, the regulations that have been posed do not create markets, they do not create incentives. They have a gaping loophole. That gaping loophole is natural gas.” (David Unger, “New EPA Rules: Coal’s Future Depends On Cheap Carbon Capture,” Christian Science Monitor, 9/23/13)"

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Jan-17-14 7:43 PM

Rock, "while Clinton bore the rewards from the high tech bubble which Dubya squandered like a drunk cowboy..."

Huh?

In case you have forgotten, there was a full-blown recession in progress when George took office. I clearly remember the wailing and gnashing of teeth that the IRA had been PROVEN to be an unreliable way to save for retirement, and we were mired in a awful fix that would take decades to undo.

You usually have better logic than this nonsense.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Jan-17-14 7:36 PM

Rock, Old George sent his people to Congress several times to request more power to increase regulation and oversight of Fannie and Freddie, that were routinely blocked by impassioned pleas from Bawney Fwank and Chris Dodd. Hunt them up on the net, it's entertaining to see Frank frothing at the mouth about attempts to block the po' folk from buying into the American Dream via subprime loans.

Old George also finally managed to force out Franklin Raines, CEO of Fannie, for P&L frauds that would have make Enron blush. BTW, Raines collected about $100 million in bonuses for non-existent profits. Stock fraud, like Enron. Know how big the settlement fine was? About $10 mil. Know how much time he did? Not a day. He's still one of obie's closest advisors.

Odd, that not a single Wall Street fat cat was indicted for all that banking fraud the lefties rail against. Guess the AG is too busy suing Arizona.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-17-14 7:07 PM

RockE, are you're afraid to go to the US Treasury website to see that the National Debt went UP every Clinton year, or is it that you just can't do the math?

w ww.treasurydirect.g ov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/mspd.htm

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RockEReputation

Jan-17-14 6:49 PM

Even assuming accrual accounting, all reports equate to surpluses of $69.2 billion for fiscal 1998, $76.9 billion surpluses in fiscal 1999, and $46 billion in fiscal 2000. THE deficit was erased in those three years.

Now take your butch, private body-part referencing lemming existence...and go contemplate and complete a double-back flip from . Lover's Point Park...oh, purveyor of babble...

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-17-14 6:46 PM

RockERevisionist “Clinton bore the rewards from the high tech bubble”

Yes, and there’s a reason it’s called a bubble. Clinton’s Inflation Czar Greenspan called it “irrational exuberance.” And Clinton did nothing to stabilize that certain-to-burst bubble because he was too busy lying to Congress about the definition of the word “is.”

RockERevisionist “Clinton didn't buy two wars on the credit card”

You mean the two wars Hillary “Butcher of Benghazi” Clinton VOTED TO AUTHORIZE? Remember, those two rattlesnakes come as a package deal...

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 6:07 PM

The DOT com was fraud that left Bush to deal with making it a Bust along with prosecuting Enron, Worldcom, and the rest of the Clinton con-job disasters that he couldn't deal with.

Clinton NEVER produced a surplus, left Office $1.9 TRILLION deeper in the Hole than when he came in.

Which is about 1 years spending from Barack "Liar of the Year 2013" Obama versus 8 years for Bill "Liar of the year 1998" Clinton.

Watching RockeRetardo babble liberal lying talking points is about as exciting as watching Joe Biden color his books for the Biden Library .ZZzzzzzzzzzzzz.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RockEReputation

Jan-17-14 4:48 PM

EPA Politics?...whateva...while Clinton bore the rewards from the high tech bubble which Dubya squandered like a drunk cowboy...and while Clinton didn't buy two wars on the credit card ..it was the low interest rates and the interest-only loans of 04-05 that swelled the housing bubble to its burstacious level.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 4:20 PM

GDP growth under Bush 14.8%

GDP Growth under Ovomit: 8.35

Ovomit spending to boost economy: $5 TRILLION

Bush: ZERO.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 4:04 PM

Financial Collapse ...was loans to deadbeats . . . .

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Jan-17-14 4:03 PM

RockeRetardo, the cause of the Financial as an warm body with a pulse in the last 20 years knows, was the COmmunicty Redevlopoment ACT, which we know, just meant Banks had to approve loads to deadbeats who otherwise could NOT AFFORD to buy a house.

Housing go BOOM, loands then went BUST!

Signed by William Jefferson " devil in the Blue Dress" Clinton.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jan-17-14 2:27 PM

So you're staying with "but BUUUUSH!"?

Guess I'll have to stay with "LOL." Until you come up with something less LOLable.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 38 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: