Reason #2 Obama is a Bad President

The Federal government under President Obama is at war against the citizens of this country.

 For example USEPA is prepared to "crucify" violators of arcane, overly complex and virtually incomprehensible environmental laws and regulations.  So admits the EPA Region VI Administrator  Al Armendariz:





Fire.  Them.  All.  

Free Market Environmentalism

I have advocated for the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency and its supporting legislation. Why? The EPA epitomizes Soviet-style central planning. Its approach to environmental problems ia a form of tyranny that kills jobs and destroys the environment globally by exporting pollution.

In a review of a global warming book, economist Walter Block explains,

Let us make a few heroic assumptions. Anthropogenic global warming, due to greenhouse-gas emissions, is a fact. Sunspots, etc., are not responsible. There is an ideal world temperature, such that man's actions will either exceed it, or fall below it, and that this will be harmful on net balance, not beneficial.

On this basis, Baer et al. consider two approaches to addressing this danger: first, "assign obligations to the industrialized countries on the basis of both their ability to pay (wealth) and their responsibility for the majority of prior emissions, or, second, to assign emissions rights on a (possibly modified) equal per capita basis."

But, they ignore a third, which is far more justified than either of those. For, given our assumptions, emitting gas constitutes, in effect, a trespass. And what, pray tell, does "equity" have to say about uninvited border crossings? It is simple: the perpetrators of these property-rights violations, and only the perpetrators, must be brought to the bar of justice. I agree with their emphasis on individuals, not groups, but equity requires that we should ignore ability to pay as a criterion for fines. Rather, the guilty should pay, and not the innocent, just as in the case for ordinary trespass.

The EPA approach is for the relatively innocent to pay, because they can bully the innocent (or, relatively innocent).

Who are the guilty? Third world (sorry, developing? Uh, I'm not sure the current politically correct euphemism) countries, mostly.

The excessive EPA regulations in this country contribute to high production costs. what does a rational company do? Import from cheaper sources abroad. That is how we export our pollution.

Walter Block is an interesting guy.

Green Fraud

When it comes to greens, their opinions trump facts.

Green philosophy: We don't need no stinkin' facts, man!

Green Breakthroughs Explained

For copyright reasons, I can't reproduce today's Dilbert, but check out the March 29, 2011 Dilbert comic strip at www.dilbert.com where green breakthoughs are explained.

EPA Out of Control -- Regulating Milk Spills as Oil Spills

This is another ridiculous, outrageous act by a power hungry, out of control agency. The USEPA pretending that animal oils are dangerous to the environment and pretending that it therefore has authority has adopted rules regulating dairy spills. After all, milk has animal fats and oils.

The absurdity of this regulation illustrates why the US EPA should be abolished. Obviously, it does not have any real environmental hazards to go after, so it goes after milk, of all things.

If EPA has the manpower to regulate dairy spills, it desperately needs a budget cut if abolishment is politically unpalatable. Get rid of these people from our government.

Congress Wants Our Homes More Hazardous

My iwfe and I went to the Ohio State Fair. In oone of the buildings, there was a display with a hand generator. Turn the crank and light the bulb. The crank was harder to turn lighting the incandescent bulb than the CFL bulb.

I told the young lady pushing the display that it was too bad the CFL bulbs were so dangerous, containing mercury. I told here that is why I did not want to have those bulbs in my house. Her expression? Clueless. And priceless.

As the Daily Caller reports:

Here’s the problem: CFLs contain mercury, which, in high concentrations, is poisonous. When a bulb is in use, it’s a non-issue, since the mercury is safely contained in the glass tubes. But when a light bulb comes to the end of its life, whether by natural or violent causes, things get tricky.

If a light bulb breaks, as The Daily Caller reported last week, you basically have to call out the HAZMAT team. Sometimes, light bulbs simply fizzle out and die. At which point you probably climb up on a ladder, unscrew the bulb, replace it with another one, and dump the old one in a trash can.

Congress wants us to use hazardous CFL bulbs in our homes? Morons.

Bed Bugs in Ohio: EPA to Blame

Ohio is experiencing a nasty infestation in resurgent bed bug populations. EPA aims to keep it that way, by refusing to permit the use of effective and safe pesticides, because the EPA falsely (I believe) claims they are unsafe.

I am an adult American. I should have the right to take the risk. I don't need a nanny EPA telling me I cannot.

EPA folks should be wearing t-shirts that say, "Save the Bed Bugs."

Loony Left in California: Plastic Bag Ban

If there were ever any doubt that the loony left is in control in California, that doubt is now forever dispelled. Amid a serious budget crisis, the bozos in the California Assembly have passed a ban on plastic bags, prohibiting pharmacies and grocery, liquor and convenience stores from giving out plastic bags. It also calls for customers to be charged for using store-issued paper bags. No more using the bags to pick up dog waste or other recycled uses. Read more at Breitbart here.

The bill has not yet passed the California Senate, but watch that faux Republican Governor Schwartzenegger sign it if it does. He favors the ban, we are told.

More headlines: Clean Air and Global Warming

I am almost tempted to classify this under humor, but the following headline is for real:

Could Cleaner Air Actually Intensify Global Warming?

The story follows:

As much of the world marked Earth Day this past week, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that air pollution has declined dramatically over the past 20 years. It sounds like good news, but science writer Eli Kintisch argues that there's a surprising downside: Cleaner air might actually intensify global warming.

"If we continue to cut back on smoke pouring forth from industrial smokestacks, the increase in global warming could be profound," Kintisch writes in an opinion piece for the Los Angeles Times.

Read it all.

Fire up those obsolete steel foundries and fight global warming!

OK, I could not resist. I did file this under humor. Unintended humor though it is.