Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Obama Equates EPA Restrictions And Compliance Costs as being "Good" for the Economy

Nasty... don't mean a thing.

Oh yeah, he said it.

The counterintuitive comments came tumbling out of his mouth as he introduced EPA chief Ms. Lisa Jackson:
President Barack Obama said that EPA regulations are good for the economy and create jobs and that the agency "touches" the lives of every American every day.
Touches the lives of every American? Well, yeah, yeah... what a minute! What a minute!! Those regulations are forcing people to comply. Forcing, Mr. President. Thus, the EPA is costing businesses to spend their resources, not on producing their product and being competitive, but on complying with Lisa Jackson's EPA.

"I don't like no nasty girl.
I don't like no nasty food.
The only nasty thing I like
Is a nasty groove.

Nasty... don't mean a thing.

Cause privacy is my middle name.
My last name is control.
No, my first name ain't baby.
It's Lisa... Ms. Jackson if you're nasty."

And now... back to our president:
“We can make sure that we are doing right by our environment and, in fact, putting people back to work all across America. When we put in place new common-sense rules to reduce air pollution, we create new jobs building and installing all sorts of pollution-control technology,” Obama said.
What a moron.


  1. You are right to call bullsh*t on this entire "game," James. I call it a game because everyone involved knows that not a single life will be saved by any of it--it's all a play for these neo-Luddites to shut down American business or switch to some more expensive non-combustion alternative fuel. And none of the impacts of these alternatives have been fully explored. How does this game work? From recent examples, it goes like this. You find a small study or two that see new concerns from some combustion product that hasn't raised much concern or regulation in the past, studies that are not well-regarded by mainstream scientists because of small sample sizes or ridiculous methodologies--like exposing lab animals to levels a million times greater than they can ever experience in the real world [remember the "poison" is in the dose]. Then the EPA sets up a half-assed research study of their own--one with few samples and no control group, based on their recent work. This is the kind of thing one would see for a science project at school, except there you would see a control group if there was to be a passing grade. In the tests, the EPA finds the offending compound in the study participants' bloodstream and makes ridiculous claims as to how many lives can be saved by banning the whole combustion process, based on the "out-of-butt" numbers from the original studies that used laughable dosages to produce tumors or their health problems. In one of the EPA's recent ban-shams they had a handful of men and women exercise using a threadmill while they periodically took blood samples. They did the exercise twice each. For one round they would breath normal room air. For the other, they took air containing that combustion product from a tank and breathing apparatus. The EPA noted the "controversial" compound in the bloodstream from those tests and instituted their proposed ban. Well it turned out that the compound wasn't present in every participant--only the women. And outside scientists say that you can find such compounds in everyone at those levels if you delay a single breath during the exercise routine, even using normal air. Apparently the women were a little more reluctant to believe that what the EPA set up was safe--they delayed taking a breath like normal. Letting the normal exhalation products sit in the lungs for a few second more increases the residence time for the offending compounds to form. Now the economic impact from the ban would be at least hundreds of millions of Dollars--maybe an order of magnitude higher. And for what? I'd like to see anyone in the future ever prove that a single person benefited from the change.

    That's the kind of stuff that Mitt Romney has to be educated about before I will cast my vote for him. He recently said that he agreed with what the EPA was doing because it was all about saving lives!!!!! Fire the freakin' lot of them! That alone will save me an ulcer or two.

  2. Sounds about right.

    Mark Levin was talking about a similar example of regulatory absurdity, reported in the New York Times no less:

    “When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.

    But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.

    In 2012, the oil companies expect to pay even higher penalties for failing to blend in the fuel, which is made from wood chips or the inedible parts of plants like corncobs. Refiners were required to blend 6.6 million gallons into gasoline and diesel in 2011 and face a quota of 8.65 million gallons this year.

    “It belies logic,” Charles T. Drevna, the president of the National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association, said of the 2011 quota.”

    Indeed. And the fees are going up for 2012. Of course.

    Thanks for the comment, Darrell. I watched Daryl Zero again. Great show. Much better now that I wasn't worried about the hero getting his cover penetrated, and Ben Stiller was really funny as the miffed assistant. Could not figure out how Zero got ahead of the drops, on either the first or second event, but I did notice that Zero was actually on the escalator at the airport. He told Steve Arlo to wait at the end as he passed by, just before Zero called Arlo on the pay phone. Totally had missed him the first two times through.

    Now about that stewardess blogger mystery...

  3. I suggest you read what I wrote on the Zero thread.
    The voiceover is material for his memoir. And as with most memoirs, there
    is more than a little exaggeration going on. He follows Ryan O'Neal to the building and then he can follow the written instructions, even get ahead of O'Neal if he wishes. But I suspect that he kept a distance at first from the men's washroom to see who else was keeping an eye on it.

    The Internet Explorer issue seems to be fixed now. Thanks!