Prev: *BURP*
Next: {BS} Still nowhere near the flood of 1936
From: Mike Hunter on 31 Mar 2010 11:56
Our friend dr_jeff reminds me of a discussion several us had when the
Congress created the EPA. One of the guys, who I consider to be one of the
Environuts, rather than an Environmentalist, opined that they finally
"passed a law that will help the people."

Another asked the question, "Who will protect us FROM the EPA when it become
filled with Environuts, rather than Environmentalist." I agreed because the
law provided a system that would be controlled by a bunch of new
Bureaucrats, rather then the Congress.

Today BO has the EPA RUN by one of the Environuts who wants to invoke the
regulations voted down by the Congress when it rejected the Cap and Trade
bill. Cap and trade has proven to be a disaster for countries, like
Spain, who had enacted Cap and Trade laws.

We are all environmentalist in that we do not want to $#it were we eat, but
the Environuts do not want us to eat so there will be no $#it to deal with.

By the EPA by setting dates certain to reach a goal, rather than giving
industries the time to develop new and better ways to do what they do,
destroyed the US steel, cement, chemical, plastics and paint industries.
It also pushed back by at least ten or fifteen years, the manufacturing of
the fine, clean, fuel efficient vehicles we have today, because the industry
was forced to jury rig old technology. I worked in the automobile industry
and witnessed what happed.

President Reagan was right when he said government it not the answer to the
counties problems, government is the CAUSE.

No President in history has ever tripled our national debt in one year as
had BO. No President has forced a law on the taxpayers that they did not
want that will add trillions of dollars more to the debt, for the at least
the next ten years, according the latest CBO estimate as the REAL cost of
the new so called health care bill

In ten years the bill will cost MORE than nation defense, S.S. and Medicare
COMBINED and will be 90% of our total GDP, an unsustainable debt for our
country.

"dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message
news:QZ6dnS6ioeeYsi7WnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> Bill Putney wrote:
>> dr_jeff wrote:
>>
>>> They regulate drugs, requiring that the meet certain purity and
>>> effectiveness standards. They regulate doctors, teachers and other
>>> professionals, requiring that they don't have a serious criminal history
>>> before they can go into the clinic or classroom. What a horror? What's
>>> next? Requiring that priests don't molest children? And what right does
>>> the federal government have to make sure that cars are safe? The nerve
>>> of the government.
>>
>> Let's look at the other side of the coin: Where do you draw the line of
>> the government involvement in and micromanagement of our personal lives?
>> It sounds to me like once we violate any of the Constitution in that
>> regard, your philosophy is that that barrier is now broken, there
>> therefore now are no constraints, we throw the Constitution out.
>
> Incorrect. My philosophy is that the proper place of government (that is
> the people) is to set up regulations so that people are protected from
> unfair and unsafe practices (e.g., lending laws and health laws).
>
>> The problem is that when government has the extra-Constitutional
>> authority that it has taken on, it allows manipulation of information to
>> achieve political goals (hidden agendas). The present day is full of
>> examples in things such as "extinction of polar bears" and "global
>> warming".
>
> You seem to make the assumption that there are hidden agendas and that
> global warming is not real. Fact is that the evidence overwhelmingly shows
> that our unintentional manipulation of the CO2 concentration can have
> drastic changes in the environment and that last changes have already
> occurrred.
>
>> Once a problem is identified and linked to a cause using false science,
>> then anything that can in any way be associated with that
>> cause is subject to restriction and taxation, never mind that the
>> original premises that the controlled activity is linked is based on
>> false/manipulated science invented purely to accomplish hidden goals.
>
> That's human nature. Look how we let Bush run over us with anything linked
> to 9/11 and security.
>
> However, as pointed out, it is not false science. It is false science to
> assume that we can dump CO2 into atmosphere and destroy our environment
> without consequences.
>
>> Health care is a problem? OK - private property is no longer a valid
>> concept - we'll confiscate what we need from those who have it
>> (redistribution of wealth), Marxism rules, the Constitution drools.
>
> We already have a redistribution of wealth - from the poor to the rich. If
> you don't believe me, look at how the poor and middle class have barely
> got richer while the rich have become much richer over the last 20 or
> years. In addition, health care is a big reason why wages haven't gone up
> all that much. Companies pay so much for health care, they can't afford
> higher raises. Yet, no one has explained why health care should be paid
> for by employers.
>
>> The Constitution prohibits certain things precisely because those things
>> are subject to manipulation by despots (see Declaration of Independence).
>> Prohibiting things that otherwise may seem like the "right thing to do"
>> are protecting against a much worse "evil" (can I say that word?).
>>
>> Basically what I'm saying is that we are way down on that slippery slope
>> and have no Constitution left by all the "logic" that is being applied in
>> our political system.
>>
>> Pick up and read a copy of Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny".
>
> Right, I am going to waste my time reading anything because you recommend
> it.
>
> Jeff


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: *BURP*
Next: {BS} Still nowhere near the flood of 1936