Right, two regulations is all you oppose. Sure.obviously wells blowing up is not good, and preventing that is necessary, proper, and of great quantifiable benefit. We don't like CAFE regulations which are set on a whim and don't consider current technological limitations, we do not support as a rule the cap and trade regulations which are arbitrary, expensive, draconian, and economy killers. We do not support that which does not have a completely logical utility. Thanks for playing.
I'm guessing you don't follow the concept of "as an example" very well. Either that or you are being intentionally difficult.Right, two regulations is all you oppose. Sure.
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.
Obama talks as oil laps at Gulf of Mexico shore | The AustralianObama talks as oil laps at Gulf of Mexico shore
* From: AFP
* May 04, 2010 12:00AM
VENICE, Louisiana: US authorities raced last night to stem the tide of a disastrous oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico, as US President Barack Obama fiercely defended his response and promised federal help for as long as needed.
In drizzling rain and winds in front of Venice harbour, Mr Obama described the unfolding nightmare offshore as "a massive and potentially unprecedented environmental disaster".
He flew to Louisiana to head off mounting criticism that his government's response to the Gulf Coast disaster had been too little and too late, and to neutralise a potentially devastating soundbite, that this is "his Katrina".