The Sound of a Swamp Draining

"...the EPA's rule wrongly broadens federal authority by placing a majority of water and land resources management in the hands of the federal government. Congress and the courts have repeatedly affirmed the states have primary responsibility for the protection of intrastate waters and land management, according to Missouri attorney general Chris Koster. In the lawsuit, the states argue that the burdens created by the new EPA requirements on waters and lands are harmful to the states and will negatively affect farmers, developers and landowners.

"Koster said that he is concerned that the agencies' definition of "waters of the United States" goes far beyond what a reasonable person would consider to be a waterway. Koster noted, for example, that the new rule defines tributaries to include ponds, streams that flow only briefly during or after rainstorms, and channels that are usually dry. The definition extends to lands within a 100-year floodplain - even if they are dry 99 out of 100 years.

"DeWine added there is concern the overly-broad definition of “waters of the United States” could be used by the federal government to penalize landowners improperly. For example, the definition could be used to penalize a homeowner who remedies standing water on their property if it is within 1500 feet of even a normally dry stream bed.

"Failure to comply with the new regulations could result in fines of up to $37,500 a day. "

The only purpose of the EPA is to extend illegal federal control over private land.

Lawsuits target EPA water rule
 
You seriously believe we can prevent flooding and tornadoes? Even if we could, the side effects might be worse than the thing you're preventing.
I don't know what we're capable of, do you? You also have no idea what the consequences might be, no one does. I doubt if Julius Caesar believed we'd walk on the moon. I never believed Trump would become president. Nothing is impossible I guess.
 
You seriously believe we can prevent flooding and tornadoes? Even if we could, the side effects might be worse than the thing you're preventing.
I don't know what we're capable of, do you? You also have no idea what the consequences might be, no one does. I doubt if Julius Caesar believed we'd walk on the moon. I never believed Trump would become president. Nothing is impossible I guess.

Even if we could do it, that doesn't mean we should do it.

If you don't know what the consequences will be, then why are you insisting we should do it?
 
No, I am not against building dams to control floods, and I am not against building sea walls to protect against ocean rise. I am for working with mother nature for our mutual benefit. I am against futile efforts to fight mother nature.

Yes, I know that Republicans created the EPA to clean up our water and our air. Mission accomplished. Time for the EPA to go.
Who exactly is for futile efforts to fight mother nature?

So we now have clean air and water thanks to the EPA. What makes you think the air and water will stay clean?
Actually, our air and our water are not cleaner than they were. They are worse.

They EPA piggy backed on cleanups that would have happened anyway, and then pretend they are the *cause*. Meanwhile, the rest of our rural streams and the air in our cities becomes increasingly foul.
:link:
 
If you don't know what the consequences will be, then why are you insisting we should do it?
I'm only insisting we attempt to learn if it can be done and what the consequences will be. Just saying something is impossible and is foolish. Finding out if something is impossible is smart.
 
Today’s climate is optimal, for us, since we tend to build our ports where the water currently meets the land. Actually we can control the weather and have been for millennia. Burning forests to promote grassland is one example. Cutting down forests and changing the land into a desert is another.

There is no proof of any of that.
 
Stupid strawman argument. No one denies the climate changes.

Smart people think you’re idiots for thinking today’s climate is optimum and thinking you can control the weather.
So climate changes and you propose to do...?

Today’s climate is optimal, for us, since we tend to build our ports where the water currently meets the land. Actually we can control the weather and have been for millennia. Burning forests to promote grassland is one example. Cutting down forests and changing the land into a desert is another.
What a crock. The most prolific period of life on earth was when the planet was much warmer than it is today.

10% of our land is permanently buried under ice. Another 20% is too cold to grow anything more than moss or other low level life. How much corn grows in ice?
 
Stupid strawman argument. No one denies the climate changes.

Smart people think you’re idiots for thinking today’s climate is optimum and thinking you can control the weather.
So climate changes and you propose to do...?

Today’s climate is optimal, for us, since we tend to build our ports where the water currently meets the land. Actually we can control the weather and have been for millennia. Burning forests to promote grassland is one example. Cutting down forests and changing the land into a desert is another.
You tell me what is wiser.
Spend trillions no one has to affect less than 1% of your supposed manmade warming or spend 10% of that simply adapting to it?
 
If you don't know what the consequences will be, then why are you insisting we should do it?
I'm only insisting we attempt to learn if it can be done and what the consequences will be. Just saying something is impossible and is foolish. Finding out if something is impossible is smart.
No, you're doing much more than that. You just recently posted a aundry list of things you wanted the government to do, and more research was only one of them.

Of course, I'm firmly opposed to giving more money to con artists and charlatins to produce propaganda.
 
The Sound of a Swamp Draining



sounds exactly like shit when it drains out of the op's head
Screen-Shot-2017-12-11-at-8.46.08-PM.png
 
The EPA is staffed entirely by Marxist kranks who wan't to destroy capitalism.
Also, thank you for sharing. Happy hour started early today I guess
I realize the truth is painful for you.
You seem to realize a lot of things that don’t exist in reality. Carry on if it makes you happy
But that is reality. The EPA is staffed with Marxists.
How do you know? Last I check Pruitt was running the joint. Is he a Marxist? How many marxists has he fired?
 
The EPA is staffed entirely by Marxist kranks who wan't to destroy capitalism.
Also, thank you for sharing. Happy hour started early today I guess
I realize the truth is painful for you.
You seem to realize a lot of things that don’t exist in reality. Carry on if it makes you happy
But that is reality. The EPA is staffed with Marxists.
Fanatical, criminal, anti-constitutional gun grabbing marxists.
 
The EPA is staffed entirely by Marxist kranks who wan't to destroy capitalism.
Also, thank you for sharing. Happy hour started early today I guess
I realize the truth is painful for you.
You seem to realize a lot of things that don’t exist in reality. Carry on if it makes you happy
But that is reality. The EPA is staffed with Marxists.
How do you know? Last I check Pruitt was running the joint. How many marxists has he fired?

He doesn't have to..they're deserting the sinking ship...

Report: Hundreds of EPA employees leave under Trump - CNNPolitics
 
EPA marxist cowards value nothing more than their own bottom line.

They are leaving before they get fired and prosecuted.
 
The EPA is staffed entirely by Marxist kranks who wan't to destroy capitalism.
Also, thank you for sharing. Happy hour started early today I guess
I realize the truth is painful for you.
You seem to realize a lot of things that don’t exist in reality. Carry on if it makes you happy
But that is reality. The EPA is staffed with Marxists.
How do you know? Last I check Pruitt was running the joint. How many marxists has he fired?
It's virtually impossible to fire civil servants and career bureaucrats. Furthermore, he would have to fire everyone in the entire department to clean out all the Marxists. Your standard is not the measure of how many Marxists infest the department.
 
Also, thank you for sharing. Happy hour started early today I guess
I realize the truth is painful for you.
You seem to realize a lot of things that don’t exist in reality. Carry on if it makes you happy
But that is reality. The EPA is staffed with Marxists.
How do you know? Last I check Pruitt was running the joint. How many marxists has he fired?
It's virtually impossible to fire civil servants and career bureaucrats. Furthermore, he would have to fire everyone in the entire department to clean out all the Marxists. Your standard is not the measure of how many Marxists infest the department.
Trump and his team are brilliant.

BLM *agents* are deserting as well.

And that's what he once. once they abandon posts, they don't backfill those positions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top