Environment gets Bushed

[Sims2789]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/11/bush.global.warming.ap/index.html

The Bush administration, dismissing the recommendations of its top experts, rejected regulating the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming Friday, saying it would cripple the U.S. economy. ...

Ignoring a 2007 Supreme Court decision that found that CO2 is a pollutant as defined under the Environmental Protection Act and therefore must be regulated as such by the Environmental Protection Agency, Bush announced that he will not regulate carbon dioxide. I wonder if Pelosi will change the Environmental Protection Act to explicitly exclude CO2 from regulation so that her friend Bush is off the hook.

Around the same day that Bush declared that his EPA is above the law, CO2, he left the G8 Summit by saying "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter!" [link]

For those of you wondering how the courts can do this, read the following:

+The Environmental Protection Act describes what is a pollutant under the act but doesn't explicitly name all of them.

+The Environmental Protection Agency must regulate pollutants as they are defined under the Act. So, the SCOTUS decision had nothing to do with whether carbon dioxide actually contributes to global warming; it dealt with whether or not carbon dioxide is a pollutant as described in the Environmental Protection Act.

+Thus, when the Environmental Protection Agency claimed that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant as described under the Environmental Protection Act, a suit was brought. Since one of the courts' roles is to settle legal disagreements between parties, they found that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Environmental Protection Act and thus must be regulated as such by the Environmental Protection Agency.

+So, the Supreme Court did not write regulations from the bench. It attempted to enforce existing regulations that were passed as an act of Congress and signed by the President of the United States, but which the current President of the United States and his administration incorrectly believed did not apply to carbon dioxide.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Hes gone in a few months anyway.
(as long as he dosnt launch a botched pre-emptive strike(s) why bother)

 

[Oerdin]

The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter."

He then punched the air while grinning widely, as the rest of those present including Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy looked on in shock.

Mr Bush, whose second and final term as President ends at the end of the year, then left the meeting at the Windsor Hotel in Hokkaido where the leaders of the world's richest nations had been discussing new targets to cut carbon emissions.

One official who witnessed the extraordinary scene said afterwards: "Everyone was very surprised that he was making a joke about America's record on pollution."

Mr Bush also faced criticism at the summit after Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, was described in the White House press pack given to journalists as one of the "most controversial leaders in the history of a country known for government corruption and vice".

The White House apologised for what it called "sloppy work" and said an official had simply lifted the characterisation from the internet without reading it.

Concluding the three-day event, leaders from the G8 and developing countries proclaimed a "shared vision" on climate change. However, they failed to bridge differences between rich and emerging nations on curbing emissions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...odbye-from-the-world's-biggest-polluter'.html

 

[Oerdin]

In short, worst president ever. I can't believe how many of my countrymen were stupid enough to vote for him. TWICE. :shame

 

[Merkinball]

The court has the ability to tell congress to control business? Really?

 

[El_Machinae]

We've generated enough wealth in the last 40 years that we can easily afford to deal with our pollution issues. Honestly, we could easily afford the world's CO2 pollution issues, but that might not be fair or ideal.

The Bottom Billion people (the truely and endemically poor) would be completely incapable of dealing with the pollution we're shovelling onto them, since their economic growth rates are well below the economic costs of Climate Change.

 

[Phlegmak]

Environment gets Bushed

Sounds normal.

 

[El_Machinae]

Sounds normal.

The man was long on ideology, and his ideology was short on biology.

 

[Godwynn]

saying it would cripple the U.S. economy.

I found that funny.

 

[Integral]

I found that funny.

Now now, Godwynn; rumors of our economy's collapse have been greatly exaggerated. It could be worse!

We've generated enough wealth in the last 40 years that we can easily afford to deal with our pollution issues. Honestly, we could easily afford the world's CO2 pollution issues, but that might not be fair or ideal.

What do you suggest? Beyond the usual mantras of "raise the gas tax" and "improve efficiency", I mean.

 

[skadistic]

We've generated enough wealth in the last 40 years that we can easily afford to deal with our pollution issues. Honestly, we could easily afford the world's CO2 pollution issues, but that might not be fair or ideal.

Co2 isn't pollution.

 

[Narz]

The Bush administration, dismissing the recommendations of its top experts, rejected regulating the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming Friday, saying it would cripple the U.S. economy. ...

Well, good thing he didn't listen & now we have a booming economy with only blue skies ahead as far as the eye can see. What a great man!

 

[bhsup]

Clarification: The OP is totally false as the SC never did any such thing according to the very article linked. The SC ruled that the government has the authority to regulate green house gases, but it didn't (and I would tell it to piss off if it did) just pull some arbitrary regulations out from under its robes and tell the White House to follow them.

 

[History_Buff]

What do you suggest? Beyond the usual mantras of "raise the gas tax" and "improve efficiency", I mean.

Cap and trade. End of discussion.

Co2 isn't pollution.

 

[skadistic]

Yeah, I know its hilarious people actually think that is a pollutant.

 

[imperfect.la]

Cap and trade. End of discussion.

Co2 is the basic building block of life. Trees take in Co2 from the atmosphere, and by using solar energy, they create organic compounds that are at the bottom of the food chain. Essentially all life is carbon based, because we consume plans as well as creatures that eat plants, getting our carbon from them. I'm kinda dumbfounded at what they don't teach in biology class anymore.

 

[Ammar]

Yeah, I know its hilarious people actually think that is a pollutant.

Really depends on how you define pollutant I guess. Since it has rather negative consequences in the amounts we output, it's at least fair to call the human CO2 contribution pollution, though.

Co2 is the basic building block of life. Trees take in Co2 from the atmosphere, and by using solar energy, they create organic compounds that are at the bottom of the food chain. Essentially all life is carbon based, because we consume plans as well as creatures that eat plants, getting our carbon from them. I'm kinda dumbfounded at what they don't teach in biology class anymore.

There are many organic and naturally organic compounds which are rightfully considered pollution when in concentrations too high. So you manage to repeat something that is probably trivial and know to everyone here and yet manage to miss the point completely.

 

[Leonel]

The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter."

That is exactly what I would have done too. But I would have done it in a cowboy getup and shot toy revolvers in the air while going YEEEHAWW!

But seriously, he already knows he's the most hated person in the world and not even sacrificing himself to save the world from a disaster like an asteroid about to hit the Earth is going to change that. He'd be crazy NOT to go out in style!

 

[skadistic]

Really depends on how you define pollutant I guess. Since it has rather negative consequences in the amounts we output, it's at least fair to call the human CO2 contribution pollution, though.

Co2 is still not a pollutant. Its not even the biggest driver in "global warming". What it is is a convenient scapegoat used to hoodwink the ignorant.

If all those people who cry about Co2 were really concerned they would stop breathing.

 

[Ammar]

Co2 is still not a pollutant. Its not even the biggest driver in "global warming". What it is is a convenient scapegoat used to hoodwink the ignorant.

Well, be sure to write this to all those stupid climatologists. Guess they studied for nothing.

If all those people who cry about Co2 were really concerned they would stop breathing.

Yeah, and if all those people were really concerned about Iran they would sneak there and sabotage the missiles personally, right?