I know this is going to come as a shock, but it looks like Bushco is lying about the environment. Again. "What will we tell the children?" Hell, that's easy. I tell them don't ever trust any Republican. Ever.
When the Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a rule last week to limit mercury emissions from U.S. power plants, officials emphasized that the controls could not be more aggressive because the cost to industry already far exceeded the public health payoff.
What they did not reveal is that a Harvard University study paid for by the EPA, co-authored by an EPA scientist and peer-reviewed by two other EPA scientists had reached the opposite conclusion.
That analysis estimated health benefits 100 times as great as the EPA did, but top agency officials ordered the finding stripped from public documents, said a staff member who helped develop the rule. Acknowledging the Harvard study would have forced the agency to consider more stringent controls, said environmentalists and the study's author.
Maybe that explains all these moron ConservaBorg. Their moms must've eaten too much fish while the little fascists were in the womb.
You know it's hopeless arguing about global warming with these people. They've got a real, definite threat to public health staring them in the face with immediate, measureable consequences, and they won't even be honest about that. And why should they? Do you honestly think any Bush voter is going to change their mind just because of a silly thing like lying about Mercury in the environment? Hell, these fuckbrains were willing to swallow a whole war based on lies and come begging for more. Mercury's nothing!
Oh, and speaking of numbers and statistics, Eric Alterman points to this great numerical summary of the Boy King's Pre-emptive War About WMD uh Evil Dictators uh UN Resolutions uh Rape Rooms uh Al Qaeda and Iraq uh Spreading Freedom in the Middle East.
Comments on entries can only be made in pop-up windows while those entries are still on the main index page. Sorry for the inconvenience this causes, but this blocks about 99.99% of the spam the blog receives.
You've neglected to compare the proposed legislation to the existing Clean-Air Act. You should do some research there so you have more to rant about. (The point of particular interest should be how the proposed restrictions compare to the restrictions already called for by the current Clean-Air Act.)
Posted by: Seattle Astronomer on March 23, 2005 11:30 AM