Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

[Si modo]

I see. Citizens dying from cancers from asbestos and dirty coal plants is good. More profits. Children having their cognitive abilities impaired by lead and mercury emissions. Better yet for profits. Your morals are showing.

Don't worry your little head, pretty or otherwise, about that. When the Dems complete their destruction of our economy, the only pollution we will have to worry about is folks shitting in public.

 

[skookerasbil]

The left can spend every moment of every day fearmongering their asses off for the next 13 months. Im enjoying every moment of their misery. And when the Varsity is back in control...........trust me.......Im going to be on here rubbing salt in the wound to the point of hysteria I'll be laughing so hard, via, of course, my gay MSPAINT Photobucket Masterpieces!!!!!!!

So spin on s0ns.........tea party this and republicans that. Knock yourselves out with 100 posts a day ( which some of these meatheads actually do daily). Go join an Occupy function. But be sure to tune into this forum next November...........when the Varsity turns out the lights on this Humpy Dumpty Land BS. Turning this forum into a playland for conservatives, effectively banishing modern liberalism to the museum, propped up in a big glass case like a relic of a former era!!

 

[skookerasbil]

I see. Citizens dying from cancers from asbestos and dirty coal plants is good. More profits. Children having their cognitive abilities impaired by lead and mercury emissions. Better yet for profits. Your morals are showing.

Don't worry your little head, pretty or otherwise, about that. When the Dems complete their destruction of our economy, the only pollution we will have to worry about is folks shitting in public.

Dont laugh Si Modo........the k00ks down on Wall Street near me are down there taking dumps on police cars as we speak and then walking immediately into a nearby posh restaurant and doing take out for breakfast, lunch and dinner. You know what that costs in NYC? Im 40 minutes drive from midtown and go in there maybe 5-6 times a year. Why? Because you cant afford to go in there. Eating alone anywhere in Manhattan costs a small fortune. This Occupy BS is the biggest fraud ever after the global warming hoax.........almost all these meatheads stuff themesleves on an expensive ass lunch and then hop on their iPads to surf the web in their Bass ProShops high end tent!!. Hysterical shit..........

 

[whitehall]

"Green" technology could kill you. Solar panels contain cadmium and arsenic as well as nitrogen triflouride. The manufacture is so hazardous that they make the stuff in China. Studies indicate that the particular radiation emitted by solar panels is harmful. Studies indicate that living near a wind turbine farm can result in heart disease, tinnitus, vertigo and migranes. If a mercury bulb breaks in your home there is a book of hazmat instructions that you need to follow. If it breaks over your head as is common with light bulbs you are in trouble. What happens in ten or fifteen years when the mercury builds up in the landfills? Lefties don't think that far ahead? Studies indicate that pregnant women are at risk if they drive a hybred car. The electromagnet field might cause lukemia in the unborn. Like what you hear? Factor inb the billions of taxpayer dollars that Obama is throwing away at failed "green" factories like Solaris and you have an epidemic of stupidity on the left which might be caused by exposure to green technology.

 

[The Gadfly]

Jeff Schweitzer: Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer



And one wonders just why anybody believes anything the GOP has to say anymore. Talk about some nasty agendas.

For those thinking posters who actually read this rather than parroted, the ONLY bill related to emissions from coal plants during the 112th, was a bill in a continuing resolution/appropriations.

The GOP naturally voted against that because they wanted a ******* budget from the administration and the Dems.

But, it passed.

What a crock of shit that the OP believed at face value and parroted.






Polly want a cracker?

Moron.

They shot it down because they want no regulations on anything that would lower profits, no matter how bad it affects other citizens. From asbestos to smokestack emissions, the GOP for the most part, has sided against the citizen.

Yeah, we know, ANYONE who opposes statist democrats is "an enemy of the people", and "doesn't care about ____________"(insert oh-so-sympathetic supposed victim group here). Well, chew on this for a while-you can't regulate yourself into an absolutely "safe" existence, unless you wish to live in a hermetically sealed bubble. You can, however, destroy freedom and free enterprise in trying. Newsflash, Rocks-you, I and everyone else on the planet is going to die, eventually; NO ONE gets out of this world alive, no matter how many government regulations you enact. Thanks just the same, but I'd rather die sooner, as a free man, than live longer, in the suffocating embrace of the almighty state!

 

[skookerasbil]

Those who believe in government for solving societal problems..........lmao...........

Id have far more faith in a 5 year old fixing up a 12 course meal for a dozen people.

 

[Bfgrn]

For those thinking posters who actually read this rather than parroted, the ONLY bill related to emissions from coal plants during the 112th, was a bill in a continuing resolution/appropriations.

The GOP naturally voted against that because they wanted a ******* budget from the administration and the Dems.

But, it passed.

What a crock of shit that the OP believed at face value and parroted.





Polly want a cracker?

Moron.

They shot it down because they want no regulations on anything that would lower profits, no matter how bad it affects other citizens. From asbestos to smokestack emissions, the GOP for the most part, has sided against the citizen.

You moron

You have yet to learn that by increasing the cost of doing a business, that business has to pass the cost onto the consumer.

In other words, the GOP just stopped the dems from ******* over the poor again.

wake the **** up and smell the tyranny.

A moron is someone who is oblivious to reality. That would be YOU Two Thumbs.

Here is your phrase for the day: cost externalization.

 

[bripat9643]

Jeff Schweitzer: Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

That the Grand Old Party is hostile to environmental regulation is no grand revelation. But the most recent assault on the EPA is, even for Republicans and Tea Party enthusiasts, an unusually reckless and irresponsible attack on reasonable attempts to clean our air. We are talking coal ash. Nothing like taking in some lead, cadmium and mercury with each breath and every sip of water to brighten one's day. That is just the price we must pay to reduce government interference into our private affairs.

But coal is particularly nasty. Yes, the attraction to coal is powerful and obvious because the United States sits on a reserve of nearly 250 billion tons of coal, 112 billion of which are high-quality bituminous and anthracite coals; the remainder mainly being lower-energy and dirtier lignite. With such abundance the siren song of energy independence is difficult to resist. However, burning even the highest quality anthracite is dirty business. One 500 MW power plant generates about 3 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. Other toxic byproducts include fine-grain particulates, heavy metals like mercury, lead, chromium and nickel, trace elements such as arsenic and selenium, and various organics like dichloroethane, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene. Oxides of nitrogen and sulfur are common pollutants from coal, and are found at higher levels in anthracite than in bituminous coal. The known health consequences of this toxic brew of air and water pollution are many, and include nervous system problems in infants and children, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, a suite of cardiovascular problems and kidney disease. The environmental impacts are well documented, and not pretty.

But all of those inconvenient truths are just part of a liberal conspiracy if you believe the GOP.

And one wonders just why anybody believes anything the GOP has to say anymore. Talk about some nasty agendas.

CO2 is not a pollutant. Emissions of other substances from coal fired power plants are well below levels that could possibly be considered harmful. Mercury in the environment is almost entirely from natural sources. The latest jihad against mercury is just a backdoor attempt for Obama to implement is agenda to drive carbon fuels out of business.

 

[editec]

It is astounding to see how angry and frightened these White wing trolls are about the OWS movement, isn't it?

They're apopletic with rage that the natives are getting restless.

Hyy boys?

When your masters abandon you, your fellow citizens and neighbors will still be here.

Good luck with that.

 

[Bfgrn]

Jeff Schweitzer: Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

That the Grand Old Party is hostile to environmental regulation is no grand revelation. But the most recent assault on the EPA is, even for Republicans and Tea Party enthusiasts, an unusually reckless and irresponsible attack on reasonable attempts to clean our air. We are talking coal ash. Nothing like taking in some lead, cadmium and mercury with each breath and every sip of water to brighten one's day. That is just the price we must pay to reduce government interference into our private affairs.

But coal is particularly nasty. Yes, the attraction to coal is powerful and obvious because the United States sits on a reserve of nearly 250 billion tons of coal, 112 billion of which are high-quality bituminous and anthracite coals; the remainder mainly being lower-energy and dirtier lignite. With such abundance the siren song of energy independence is difficult to resist. However, burning even the highest quality anthracite is dirty business. One 500 MW power plant generates about 3 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. Other toxic byproducts include fine-grain particulates, heavy metals like mercury, lead, chromium and nickel, trace elements such as arsenic and selenium, and various organics like dichloroethane, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene. Oxides of nitrogen and sulfur are common pollutants from coal, and are found at higher levels in anthracite than in bituminous coal. The known health consequences of this toxic brew of air and water pollution are many, and include nervous system problems in infants and children, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, a suite of cardiovascular problems and kidney disease. The environmental impacts are well documented, and not pretty.

But all of those inconvenient truths are just part of a liberal conspiracy if you believe the GOP.

And one wonders just why anybody believes anything the GOP has to say anymore. Talk about some nasty agendas.

CO2 is not a pollutant. Emissions of other substances from coal fired power plants are well below levels that could possibly be considered harmful. Mercury in the environment is almost entirely from natural sources. The latest jihad against mercury is just a backdoor attempt for Obama to implement is agenda to drive carbon fuels out of business.

WTF do you come up with this shit?

Toxic Mercury From Coal Plants Unregulated

The Bush Administration’s regulatory approach to toxic mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants was struck down by a federal court that concluded the government flouted health law in a manner reminiscent of Alice in Wonderland. The National Academies’ National Research Council has found that some 60,000 newborns a year are at risk for neurological problems such as impaired motor function due to mercury—the largest source of which is coal-fired power plants. The Food and Drug Administration urges pregnant women to limit fish intake due to widespread contamination with mercury that made its way into the food chain. In its waning days, the Clinton administration listed mercury as a toxic substance subject to strict regulation as a health threat, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under President Bush, proposed a rule to reclassify mercury from coal-fired plants under a different section of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA’s rule would have set an overall limit on mercury, while giving coal plants flexibility to meet the goal or purchase “emissions rights” from other plants—known as a “cap-and-trade” program. The EPA said it would have cut the mercury being released in the air by 70 percent by 2018 — an improvement, but less strenuous than the 90 percent reduction by 2008 that was hoped for under the Clinton administration determination. In issuing the new rule and reclassifying coal plant mercury, the EPA used language lifted — in some cases verbatim — from utility industry law and lobby firm Latham & Watkins, as well as West Associates, a research and advocacy group. It was subsequently revealed that the EPA’s own air policy administrator was unaware of the private firms’ involvement, and that insertion of the language had actually been pushed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Energy. Critics, including the EPA’s own Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee, said the plan could help create “hot spots” around power plants that would disproportionately hurt communities living in the shadow of smokestacks, because mercury emissions do not disperse evenly. Allowing dirtier power plants to purchase additional pollution credits would add to that burden. EPA’s own inspector general found that the agency’s approach “was compromised.” Ultimately, New Jersey led a group of states that challenged the mercury rules, and in February 2008, a federal appeals court delivered a unanimous ruling throwing out EPA’s reclassification of mercury from one section of the CAA to another. The court said EPA’s explanation “deploys the logic of the Queen of Hearts, substituting EPA’s desires for the plain text [of the CAA].” But EPA has argued that the Clinton administration’s original finding on mercury was “erroneous,” based on anticipated environmental effects rather than on health effects. The EPA says it took into consideration the health effects, the control technologies and the potential impacts on the electricity system in coming up with its cap-and trade approach, which it said would “achieve substantial, cost-effective reductions in mercury emissions from power plants.”

It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.
Albert Camus

 

[bripat9643]

I see. Citizens dying from cancers from asbestos and dirty coal plants is good. More profits. Children having their cognitive abilities impaired by lead and mercury emissions. Better yet for profits. Your morals are showing.

Not a single person is dying from pollution from coal fired power plants. If you think there is, then produce the hard evidence.

 

[skookerasbil]

The future is ALL about clean coal s0ns. The environmental alrmists dont want to hear it for a second...........but it is what it is. Once the Varisity gets back in command after next November its ready, set, go on clean coal.............

Dirty Coal, Clean Future - Magazine - The Atlantic

And I'll be laughing my balls off because Ive been sayng it for years!!!

 

[flacaltenn]

The future the Teabaggers and GOP wish for us and our children. This has already happened, so we know that they would do it again. Dirty, damned regulations that keep businesses from operating any way that they wish to.
Donora Killer Smog Noted at 50

In house after house, Bill Schempp placed the mask over the faces of neighbors who were wheezing and gasping for air. He'd give them a little oxygen from the tank, then stop.
They'd start to wheeze again, and the firefighter would give them a bit more. But eventually, it was time to move to the next home in Donora, Washington County, to relieve, at least temporarily, the labored breathing of those worst affected by the air pollution that enveloped the town.

"I'm dying, and you're taking my air from me," Schempp, now 81, recalls being told.

Fifty years ago this week, a killer smog created by unchecked industrial emissions and stagnant air conditions filled the then-thriving mill town in the Mon Valley.

Newspapers reported that 21 people died over two days as a direct result of the smog, and more than a third of the town's population, or about 6,000 people, became ill or were hospitalized.

Wow -- incredible drama there Rocks.. If MAYBE your vaunted EPA didn't equate Carbon Dioxide with all those REAL DANGEROUS pollutants that you listed in the Coal post above, people might take the REAL threats more seriously..........

 

[flacaltenn]

I see. Citizens dying from cancers from asbestos and dirty coal plants is good. More profits. Children having their cognitive abilities impaired by lead and mercury emissions. Better yet for profits. Your morals are showing.

Not a single person is dying from pollution from coal fired power plants. If you think there is, then produce the hard evidence.

Statistically, it probably does reduce lifetime for folks living in proximity to coal plants. Long-term exposure is a problem. Would be hard to produce a dead child though. Or even one that has reduced cognitive abilities due to lead emissions.. Unless they are playing in the ash ponds..

 

[bripat9643]

Not a single person is dying from pollution from coal fired power plants. If you think there is, then produce the hard evidence.

Statistically, it probably does reduce lifetime for folks living in proximity to coal plants. Long-term exposure is a problem. Would be hard to produce a dead child though. Or even one that has reduced cognitive abilities due to lead emissions.. Unless they are playing in the ash ponds..

The statistics I've seen are all grossly exaggerated. There's no evidence that any child has been exposed to dangerous levels of lead or mercury. Children are in much greater danger form mercury in fish, which is almost entirely natural in origin.

 

[Bfgrn]

not a single person is dying from pollution from coal fired power plants. If you think there is, then produce the hard evidence.

statistically, it probably does reduce lifetime for folks living in proximity to coal plants. Long-term exposure is a problem. Would be hard to produce a dead child though. Or even one that has reduced cognitive abilities due to lead emissions.. Unless they are playing in the ash ponds..

the statistics i've seen are all grossly exaggerated. There's no evidence that any child has been exposed to dangerous levels of lead or mercury. Children are in much greater danger form mercury in fish, which is almost entirely natural in origin.

link???

 

[Bfgrn]

The future the Teabaggers and GOP wish for us and our children. This has already happened, so we know that they would do it again. Dirty, damned regulations that keep businesses from operating any way that they wish to.
Donora Killer Smog Noted at 50

In house after house, Bill Schempp placed the mask over the faces of neighbors who were wheezing and gasping for air. He'd give them a little oxygen from the tank, then stop.
They'd start to wheeze again, and the firefighter would give them a bit more. But eventually, it was time to move to the next home in Donora, Washington County, to relieve, at least temporarily, the labored breathing of those worst affected by the air pollution that enveloped the town.

"I'm dying, and you're taking my air from me," Schempp, now 81, recalls being told.

Fifty years ago this week, a killer smog created by unchecked industrial emissions and stagnant air conditions filled the then-thriving mill town in the Mon Valley.

Newspapers reported that 21 people died over two days as a direct result of the smog, and more than a third of the town's population, or about 6,000 people, became ill or were hospitalized.

Wow -- incredible drama there Rocks.. If MAYBE your vaunted EPA didn't equate Carbon Dioxide with all those REAL DANGEROUS pollutants that you listed in the Coal post above, people might take the REAL threats more seriously..........

What an incredibly ignorant statement. BTW, can you name any industries that emit only CO2?

 

[Old Rocks]

I see. Citizens dying from cancers from asbestos and dirty coal plants is good. More profits. Children having their cognitive abilities impaired by lead and mercury emissions. Better yet for profits. Your morals are showing.

Not a single person is dying from pollution from coal fired power plants. If you think there is, then produce the hard evidence.

Show me one person who has died from smoking cigarettes. After all, have you ever seen anybody puff on one, then just fall over dead?

That is the kind of bullshit logic you are using.

http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.101.5.1649

Environmental Accounting for Pollution
in the United States Economy †

By Nicholas Z. Muller, Robert Mendelsohn, and William Nordhaus*

This study presents a framework to include environmental externalities into a system of national accounts. The paper estimates the air pollution damages for each industry in the United States. An integrated- assessment model quantifies the marginal damages of air pollution emissions for the US which are multiplied times the quantity of emissions by industry to compute gross damages. Solid waste combustion, sewage treatment, stone quarrying, marinas, and oil and coal-fired power plants have air pollution damages larger than their value added. The largest industrial contributor to external costs is
coal-fired electric generation, whose damages range from 0.8 to 5.6 times value added. (JEL E01, L94, Q53, Q56)

 

[BDBoop]

statistically, it probably does reduce lifetime for folks living in proximity to coal plants. Long-term exposure is a problem. Would be hard to produce a dead child though. Or even one that has reduced cognitive abilities due to lead emissions.. Unless they are playing in the ash ponds..

the statistics i've seen are all grossly exaggerated. There's no evidence that any child has been exposed to dangerous levels of lead or mercury. Children are in much greater danger form mercury in fish, which is almost entirely natural in origin.

link???

Silly goose!! Ya can't link Fox News! You know. "Some people say?"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivbDw]Outfoxed: Fox News technique: "some people say" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[daveman]

CG, that is just the attitude that the OWS movement needs you to take. Thank you, from myself and the rest. You have defined the enemy of our children wonderfully. Our children are negatively affected by breathing mercury and lead? "Can't hear you, the rustling of the bucks of big energy is too loud".

When fascism comes to America, it will be carrying a protest sign and screeching, "It's for the CHILDREN!!"