Bush vs. Schwarzenegger? Yea, that’s a smart fight to pick, George. The courts will knock down the EPA decision without question.

Wilcox-

I agree the courts will never let this BS stand. These latest bits from Bushney on climate is a pathetic last ditch stalling effort to protect their interests with respect to this issue. The 21st Century is here to stay. I think this latest weak attempt to stall is an indication that they’ve lost the battle more than anything.

Can you say, “corporatacracy?”

…and we thought all Cheney was good for was to instigate war.

Who knew!

The courts better fukking overrule this one.

How many times is this going to happen? Is this a neo-EV1 episode again?

i can see why they would the EPA would rule this way…this would lead the way for every state to do as it pleases concerning global warming, for better or worse, without any unified plan (would everybody be as grumpy if say, a red southern state, had come out and said that they’ll refuse to do anything about global warming, regardless of evidence to its existence, claiming that it doesnt exist, and therefore saying it could do as it pleased?)

this is one area where the EPA and Washington should lead the charge, but I wouldnt expect it from this Whitehouse…oh well, only a couple of months to go anyway

Merk,

The problem with your assessment is that states have to go through a fairly strenuous process to merit approval, and CA had done so a number of times previously.

Bushney isn’t satisfied with the “Worst Presidency Ever” mantle, they want more. They’re raising the bar so that their legacy is permanent.

The environment isn’t a ‘hot button’ on the right, but it will be interesting to see how the various candidates respond.

Merk: As far as letting the states ‘decide’ what they’re going to do about the emissions is a crock of krap. When you’re talking about things like sales tax and drinking age, then, yes states should make their own minds up. But the air we breathe is the air we breathe, regardless of what state you’re in. This is and should be a federal/national/global decision. Capping emissions is a no-brainer. Drinking age isn’t.

The old republican motto: let the states decide until the states start interfering with your bottom line. “We don’t mind you taxing your gas, but don’t even TRY to use less.”

i was merely playing devil’s advocate in terms of understanding the decision…

in any case, another day, another bad decision by government in general

roger that

It’s rather sad to see that states have to basically force the federal government into a lawsuit to get it to do what it is suppossed to do in the first place. Regulate industry, including the automotive industry, in order to protect the environment and indirectly thereby the health of the population as well as our natural resources. Another campaign promise proven to be a convenient lie to reach a seat of power. I guess that sort of behaviour is acceptable in american presidents… I imagine gangsters enjoy the same type of ‘respect’ and ‘unnacountability’ in our society to a lesser extent.

Reading some of Arnie’s comments on the matter in Time. I don’t live in CA any more so don’t follow his activities, but he sure seems to be getting ‘better.’ I suppose that’s what you want in an executive, improvement. You can’t be afraid to learn. I think Clinton did. Makes you think a change in Art II, Sect 1 of the Constitution should be considered.

Bushney ‘swore’ to defend the constitution and in the first line it says “…promote the general welfare.” How does that square with the EPA’s position? I know, I know, redundant questions of culpability. Speaking of which, Section 4 of the same Article lists bribery as an impeachable act. Curious, I checked several references:

The Cambridge Dictionary of ‘American’ English: the act of giving someone money or something else of value, often illegally, to persuade them to do something you want.

The 1828 Version of Webster’s (for perspective): The act or practice of giving or taking rewards for corrupt practices; the act of paying or receiving a reward for a false judgment, or testimony, or for the performance of that which is known to be illegal, or unjust. It is applied both to him who gives, and to him who receives the compensation, but appropriately to the giver.

The Wikipedia definition of bribery is the most damning for this context. Reading that one could easily make the case that Bushney is guilty of being on the receiving end of bribery. Given the current make-up of the Supreme Court, I doubt there’s much ‘support’ in that arena. Still, the issue is NOT one for the courts, although the Chief Justice would preside in this case. Wikipedia also provides an ‘out,’ noting that in some cultures tipping is considered a bribe. Since in most parts of THIS country tipping is NOT a bribe, we can conclude that most government officials don’t believe b*u*ying political influence is either.

Times change. The level of national disgust over the quality of ‘leadership’ in this country will manifest itself. Hopefully that manifestation will be in the form of campaign funding and NOT the storming of the Bastille. We shall see. Or some among us shall.

How The Game Is Played

For all those who criticized various ‘tactics’ employed by ‘supporters’ of HRC, let us be an equal opportunity condemner and throw in Obama’s ‘supporters’ as well. Including the MSM, in this case wearing the mantel of WaPo. An article on their website ‘questions’ (I always love that euphemism for asserts), in their headline, “Racial Undercurrent Is Seen In Clinton Campaign.”

The lead paragraph ‘hints’ that what it’s about to say is ‘mostly’ under the radar. Who’s radar might that be? Theirs? They go on to say that ‘backlash’ among African Americans ‘may be’ building as a result of comments by ‘associates’ of HRC that ‘could be’ construed as racial. Phew, does that not do your heart good? To know the art of obfuscation is alive and well in American’s pillar of journalism. Must be a MIGHTY slow news day.

Later we learn that Obama’s ‘campaign advisers’ are the ones saying ‘some’ African American ‘leaders’ ‘detect’ a pattern.

I could give a rat’s ptui about either campaign and what they say, it’s all part of How The Game Is Played, but kudos to WaPo for their part in the game.

what i am really worried about is the harmful effect of taco bell’s beans, and any resulting flatulent methane outgassing released into the upper atmosphere…

So, tell me again why we pay for a centralized agency to ‘protect’ the environment? I’d rather be able to have local power restored so I can fight polluters affecting me. Its not my business otherwise. It makes no sense to centralize such a corruptible position of power.

Its not our governments responsibility to enforce environmental restrictions anyhow. That is our responsibility as consumers. I walk and bus everywhere, but does that mean I should start petitioning for laws, forcing everyone else to walk and bus too? Personal responsibility and repercussions to local consequences of polluters is enough. We don’t need the government to tell us how to live.

I should have thought that by the 21st Century it shouldn’t be necessary to have geography, meteorology and sociology lessons to explain the need for a strong, centralized government administering agencies such as the EPA which you apparently think is unnecessary.

I believe the farmers of the Midwest would disagree with your assessment, they having a decided interest in what the ore foundries are doing in the Rocky Mountain states. Not only can they, the foundries, pollute the water those farmers use for drinking and agriculture, but they, the foundries, also can pollute the air the farmers and their families breathe, Air, that moves Eastward in response to the rotation of the Earth. That covers geography and meteorology.

As for sociology, you can imagine how the farmers might feel if the political organizations of the Rocky Mountain states thumbed their collectively noses at them, citing the necessity for employment in their communities.

One of the blessings of this country is that it was founded AFTER the Age of Enlightenment by one people speaking one language, unencumbered with the burden of royalty and the feudal system. You need only look to Europe and the 20th Century to see the discord and problems they encountered.

When you have no centralized agency looking out for the well-being of ALL the citizens of a land, forget country, and you have conflict, farmers vs miners, the result is war. I would have thought the Civil War demonstrated that even this country is/was not above such barbaric behavior. If it hadn’t been for Lincoln, this country would have turned out as half-assed as Europe.

Lincoln begot America, America begot Roosevelt, Roosevelt besmote Hitler and begot Truman and Marshall and Truman and Marshall besaved Europe. Funny how that worked out.

To put it simply, if it wasn’t for a strong central government in this country, the world would still be mired in the Middle Ages.

Merry Christmas.

Under the Clean Air Act, California has every right to set their own policy and they are the only state able to do so. Other states can, however adopt California policy. CA has met all the requirements for the waiver to be passed. If you look online at the Committee of Oversight and Reform page, you can find some of the documents found between the Department of Transportation and Senators trying to gain vocal opposition for CA’s waiver, and in addition emails and phone call longs from the DOT to the EPA, trying to get the waiver delayed. I think it is rediculous that this has happened and California has every right to pass this law.

Mike,

I think they should ignore the EPA and tell the auto manufacturers they can’t s-e-ll cars in CA unless they meet the requirements. Then let the courts settle it. At the very least it will keep the light shining into a very dark corner.

MCP is giving me trouble, again. Gonna find out what word it doesn’t like.

DD -

Brilliant plan, Dennis. Maybe we can deal another blow to the US auto-industry.

Ole,

The auto industry has NEVER led. They’ve had to be kicking and screaming into the 21st Century. Merely maintaining a well established protocol.

If they had a scintilla of interest in ANYTHING other then the status quo, none of this would be necessary.

The industry could have been a beacon of light for capitalism, instead it chose the low road. They makes their choice, they haves to live with it.

seems the auto industry has been digging it’s own grave for the last 30 years by ignoring the will of the people and by making it’s bed with the oil industry, had they funded R&D in efficiency and electricts as much as they funded their obfuscation they would have world class products that everyone would be happy to purchase.
I guess they figure, like the airline companies that are mismanaged into the ground, they will also be bailed out and won’t even have to cover their pension plans and other obligations.
In the meantime, the executives that ran the company into the ground will get to keep the 100s of millions of dollars a year they extracted from the system by underpaying their employees, shortcutting safety, undercutting healthcare and ripping off their customers.
Here’s an Idea. the board of directors and the executive leadership is investigated and prosecuted for professional mismanagement for causing a bankruptcy in an industry that is a NEED for the population and should never have folded. Since our executives tend to ultimately become our politicians, shouldn’t they be exposed to accountability in their private careers as well as in government?

Jed,

I’m all for it except there is no precedence for accountability in this country.

Unfortunately, that seems to be the case. They focus on the effects and tend to ignore the causes. therefore, they normally hold the wrong people accountable and try to impose ’solutions’ based on fallacy. Therefore, you have the problems we have in our industries.

DD-

[This is slightly off-topic and related to a previous thread, but I think it is very relevant - harnessing renewables is the key to real reductions in greenhouse and other pollutants.]

I think you missed my point. The auto industry doesn’t need to lead in this case. The auto industry is in business to serve demand of consumers for a profit. They are manufacturers and peddlers of automobiles, we should not expect them to be more. (maybe that means we need to find a way to keep them from meddling with politics, but that’s another discussion) Why would you of all people expect a corporation to provide leadership in social change? This is not going to happen.

Right now, there is no way to harness renewable energy for use in automobiles. If you think I am being pessimistic, think about a windmill on top of a car – doesn’t seem practical. Neither does a geothermal car…whatever that might mean. Even solar cars have little to offer. The only way to harness renewables for use in automobiles is through plug-in cars. Today, you can convert a Prius to go very far on electric alone or to get 100 mpg. However, if you plug your car in, you are drawing current that was generated largely through burning of fossil fuels. The best way that we can change this is through increasing renewable-derived power-generating capacity and possibly through a grid that allows for more efficient distribution of power from these geographically-dependent power sources. In other words, we will probably need a DC grid so that solar power generated in Arizona can be utilized in Wisconsin; Massachusetts wind can be used in Arkansas; Oregon geothermal can be used in Kansas, etc. Europe is way ahead of us in this regard. This is not because their auto industry has shown leadership or even just stayed out of politics. One significant reason is that there is a genuine interest in renewables among the general public, which exists because, from my experience, people in Europe have a better understanding of the technological underpinnings of converting from fossil to renewable. This allows for richer political discussion of the issue, versus what we have here – a sort of ‘heroes and villains’ perspective that accomplishes little more than laying blame.

Ole,

A couple of points.

First, I agree with just about everything you say. Second, if I implied I looked to the auto industry for leadership, I, in the words of that imminent orator Dan Rather, misspoke. I think you know my position vis a vis corporations and gov’t. It’s gov’t’s job to lead. My comments were addressed more towards the auto industry digging in their feet and, as you implied, b-u-ying off the gov’t.

Third, I doubt I suggested that cars carry around windmills. What I suggested was that windmills could feed the grid you described, much better than I, I’m sure. So could wave-generated electricity. So could thermal and solar generated.

Fourth, back to the auto industry, not only do they drag their feet and b-u-y political favors, they also actively resist innovation when it’s presented to them. I leave that argument to Jed, but don’t want it eliminated from the discussion.

Fifth, I did miss your point. Your oversight or mine?

My point is that the auto industry is inevitably going to pull this crap from time to time. They are backed into a nasty corner right now and policy engineering is not beneath them. Converting to a renewable energy based economy is something much bigger than the auto industry versus the public. Legislating emission standards is not going to do it. Don’t get me wrong, this is not meaningless. It represents a significant groundswell of support for cleaner energy. First, though, we have to build the infrastructure to support renewables. That is going to take a mixture of government support and private investment. For better or for worse, people have to figure out how to make money from the conversion to the new economy. This is happening, it is going to take time. It takes more than passing a few laws to accomplish something on the scale of a transition to a renewable-based energy policy.

Agreed. And we’re talking a tad more than technology here. We’re addressing a culture. And I have little optimism for TGU’s enthusiasm for a departure from the status quo.

Hey, I’ve had muscle cars and I loved it. And I currently live about 10 miles from the nearest ‘town.’ A significant change is going to be a bit painful for Moi. They could start, of course, by rescinding the stupid helmet laws for motorcycles.

Blood: You’re exactly on point about how we get off oil, preserve the environment, lessen the effect of terrorism on the U.S. and its citizens and keep money in the average joe’s pockets. Supplementing the electricity providers with wind, solar, and mirror technology, along with the possibility of nuclear power would lead to the kind of power supply that would allow a culture of electric cars. However, time after time, the right side of the aisle vetoes legislation that would either mandate or subsidize that exact transformation. But, we contiually subsidize oil and coal.
But, aside from that kind of transformation of the overall infrastructure, why is it fuel mileage standards haven’t risen? The ‘market’ wants cars with better fuel mileage, yet our average mpg is exactly as it was when Carter mandated fuel mileage standards.
These two reasons are the main cog in the ‘cynics view’ of the oil industry.
I’d love to hear a legitimate argument as to why we subsidize oil, but subsidizing energy supplementation gets vetoed. I’d also love to hear a reasonable, logical argument about the average mpg and why it hasn’t risen.

And, lastly, as far as emissions standards being a state thing, here’s why it isn’t enough: Us on the left coast are breathing in emissions from China. So, isn’t the air we breathe a global thing??

Well Okay!!

EPA Chief Johnson was right after all when he denied CA and the 16 other states request to tighten auto emission rules. Turns out states may only get waivers in “compelling and extraordinary conditions.” Turns out ‘global warming’ (the newspaper’s term, shiit) isn’t unique to CA and their, and the 16 other states’, efforts wouldn’t reversal ‘global warming.’ Well, there you have it boys and girls, the definitive effect of the Rule Of Law.

One can’t help but think that Johnson, or his advisers (the political ones, NOT the scientific ones), must have been involved with the tobacco companies’ litigation over the health hazards of tobacco. One cigarette, they reasoned, won’t hurt you and 17 states, they reason, can’t effect ‘global warming.’ So, your request is denied.

You don’t need a crystal ball to predict that those EnnuchCons on the Supreme Court will be knocking each other over to get on THAT bandwagon.

Hmmm, post didn’t take. Gonna try again. If I ‘dupe,’ I apologize. MCP could be at morning services.