• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Frontline: War on the EPA

Lord of Planar said:
There is a large range between the stupid regulations, and no regulation. Why is it you guys are so ignorant as to thing disassembling stupid regulations that go to far, is a bad thing?

Do you think implementing a nationwide 55 MPH speed limit those years back was a good thing, or over zealous?

Are you glad or sad that we no longer have a 55MPH nationwide limit?
Click to expand...

Because those regulations are informed by the best science which has informed the decision making of the EPA. NO more though...Throw the scientists out and bring in the corporate interests to inform the EPA.

The 55mph speed limit was a fuel saving measure in response to the 1973-74 Iranian oil embargo against the U.S. It was good because it was necessary.
 
Russell797 said:
Science denial. I bet when you think of "injuring" the country all you think about is money.
Click to expand...

I'm retired and set. No one here is less interested in money.

EPA was attempting to impose ideology by fiat. That has been stopped. Free society has been defended.
 
Jack Hays said:
Your problem is that no hint of conspiracy was raised.
Click to expand...

Oh really?

"Protecting the environment was just an excuse, a vehicle to implement and enforce ideology and punish those that didn't agree."

Apparently he's a mind reader too, and can assess the intentions of another person or group of people to be something he can only imagine. The alternate reality that must exist in the mind of those who see conspiracy everywhere...Paranoia....Everything is a ruse, a cover up, a hidden agenda....

I'm so happy not to be afflicted with that mindset.
 
Russell797 said:
Oh really?

"Protecting the environment was just an excuse, a vehicle to implement and enforce ideology and punish those that didn't agree."

Apparently he's a mind reader too, and can assess the intentions of another person or group of people to be something he can only imagine. The alternate reality that must exist in the mind of those who see conspiracy everywhere...Paranoia....Everything is a ruse, a cover up, a hidden agenda....

I so happy not to be inflicted with that mindset.
Click to expand...

Not a conspiracy, but coercive politics and policy without democratic foundation or legitimacy.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Yup and many are so glad to see that the EPA is being returned to it's core responsibilities and not worrying
about a puddle on private property. It was just great when President Trump invited the coal miners to the EPA to watch him sign an EO
reversing Obama rules.

View attachment 67223961
Click to expand...

O yeah, coal mining jobs are coming back after a generation of decline through various administrations. And I have a genuine Rolex I will sell you for $20.
 
Jack Hays said:
Not a conspiracy, but coercive politics and policy without democratic foundation or legitimacy.
Click to expand...

According to who? We supposedly have an EPA to protect the environment...Environmental scientists are the experts on what aspects of the environment are endangered by mankind's activities. It goes without saying that some interests will be impacted in ways unfavorable to them. Giving into them is akin to handing the reins of the chicken coop over to the foxes.

This is nothing other than a denial and repudiation of science. It's tragic to allow the continued deterioration of the natural world...You support that process through a lack of support to protect it for the profit of a relative few.
 
Russell797 said:
According to who? We supposedly have an EPA to protect the environment...Environmental scientists are the experts on what aspects of the environment are endangered by mankind's activities. It goes without saying that some interests will be impacted in ways unfavorable to them. Giving into them is akin to handing the reins of the chicken coop over to the foxes.

This is nothing other than a denial and repudiation of science. It's tragic to allow the continued deterioration of the natural world...You support that process through a lack of support to protect it for the profit of a relative few.
Click to expand...

There is no amount of scientific expertise that confers authority to set aside the rights and freedoms of Americans.
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm retired and set. No one here is less interested in money.

EPA was attempting to impose ideology by fiat. That has been stopped. Free society has been defended.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the corporate interests who must adjust to EPA mandates.

If protecting the environment is ideology and not one of necessity then you would be right. The EPA exist's for the expressed purpose of protecting the environment. How many calls were there to abolish the EPA? Many. The polluters don't want the EPA getting in their way. You are in bed with them. It's about money for them. Perfectly understandable for them to attempt to protect their interests. They have won a temporary reprieve.. by duping the American public to vote against their own self interest. Why else would people vote to live in a sh*t hole as they did a year ago?
 
Nickyjo said:
O yeah, coal mining jobs are coming back after a generation of decline through various administrations. And I have a genuine Rolex I will sell you for $20.
Click to expand...

Hey, it's gonna be great. Now they can forget about learning a new trade and go back to work on screwing up their groundwater and putting finishing touches on their black lung. All kindsa things gonna trickle down.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no amount of scientific expertise that confers authority to set aside the rights and freedoms of Americans.
Click to expand...

Politicians take advice from all kinds of people. What have you got against scientists?
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no amount of scientific expertise that confers authority to set aside the rights and freedoms of Americans.
Click to expand...

Bull...then stop the charade and abolish the EPA..You don't want to live by the rules any authority may impose on anyone American..You have NO right to pollute my air, my water, my soil..destroy my forests and abolish my wildlife, introduce invasive species. And if people are so stupid to allow an ideology to rule them then they deserve what they get.

I'm retired to...LOTs of time and money....It's not about just me, it's about doing the right thing...for everyone and everything...There are things in this world which have value that we can not measure in monetary terms....They are priceless. To many people just don't give a sh*t.
 
eohrnberger said:
Pruitt, yes, yes. From what the program showed, and additional information, I still come to the conclusion that the EPA went way overboard, and was, and still is, in need of being trimmed back to a more reasonable and measured position in their regulations.
Click to expand...



so scrap all of it.

I call bull****. Trump made it perfectly clear he had a personal issue with the EPA. The claim of overreach dosen't wash, it that was the case you merely back them off, NOT throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Nice try though.
 
Russell797 said:
I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the corporate interests who must adjust to EPA mandates.

If protecting the environment is ideology and not one of necessity then you would be right. The EPA exist's for the expressed purpose of protecting the environment. How many calls were there to abolish the EPA? Many. The polluters don't want the EPA getting in their way. You are in bed with them. It's about money for them. Perfectly understandable for them to attempt to protect their interests. They have won a temporary reprieve.. by duping the American public to vote against their own self interest. Why else would people vote to live in a sh*t hole as they did a year ago?
Click to expand...

People voted against overreach that had nothing to do with protecting the environment or quality of life, and everything to do with an ideology-driven prescription for social organization and economic restrictions.
 
Jack Hays said:
Scott Pruitt Drains the Swamp at the EPA
McGroarty & Tuttle, The Hill

[FONT="]EPA Administrator [URL="http://thehill.com/people/edward-scott-pruitt"]Scott Pruitt[/URL] is a man who gets things done. Despite resistance from within his own agency and an environment lobby bent on stopping him, he’s doing his part to drain the swamp and return government to the people. He’s bringing what citizens demand of a federal agency: Transparency and reasoned, fact-based decision-making resting on sound statutory footing.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Take the contentious issue of global warming. Pruitt called for a [URL="https://www.axios.com/scott-pruitt-americans-deserve-a-climate-change-debate-on-tv-2457559509.html"]reasoned debate[/URL]. But his critics mocked the suggestion, claiming it would be an outrage to place “fringe” views on an even platform with “established, peer-reviewed research.” But it is tyrants and mobs — not reasonable policymakers intent on serving the public — who ridicule debate and discussion. It undercuts arbitrary rule and fear, their chief weapons. . . . [/FONT]
Click to expand...



He's due to soon hear Donnie's favorite phrase: "You're fired."
 
Grand Mal said:
Hey, it's gonna be great. Now they can forget about learning a new trade and go back to work on screwing up their groundwater and putting finishing touches on their black lung. All kindsa things gonna trickle down.
Click to expand...

And with their pre-existing condition, and risky life style....if the conservatives get their way they won't have health insurance either, but they will still vote the same way, because the constitution baby, the constitution.
 
Jack Hays said:
People voted against overreach that had nothing to do with protecting the environment or quality of life, and everything to do with an ideology-driven prescription for social organization and economic restrictions.
Click to expand...

Companies spent alot of cash to make sure many voters came to that conclusion so companies could pollute to save a quick buck.

In your case you're very likely paid to post this stuff so you know better.
 
Lord of Planar said:
There is a large range between the stupid regulations, and no regulation. Why is it you guys are so ignorant as to thing disassembling stupid regulations that go to far, is a bad thing?

Do you think implementing a nationwide 55 MPH speed limit those years back was a good thing, or over zealous?

Are you glad or sad that we no longer have a 55MPH nationwide limit?
Click to expand...



So how about showing us the evidence that the EPA has overreached?

Typical of Trumpies, you CLAIM this and CLAIM that, and your only evidence is your obvious contempt for anyone who thinks differently.

If it's there, you should be able to deliver it handily.

But we all know you will either ignore this or respond with bile ridden insults
 
Jetboogieman said:
Companies spent alot of cash to make sure many voters came to that conclusion so companies could pollute to save a quick buck.

In your case you're very likely paid to post this stuff so you know better.
Click to expand...

Wrong on both counts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom