Texas Sues to Block Bizarre "Global Warming" EPA Rules

WOAI ^ | 9/16/10 | Jim Forsyth

[laotzu]

The state of Texas today sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in a federal appeals court in Washington DC, claiming four new regulations imposed by the EPA are based on the thoroughly discredited findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and are 'factually flawed,'.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott says the rules are illegal and if imposed, will cost Texans in higher energy costs and tens of thousands of lost jobs.

"The state explained that the IPCC, and therefore the EPA, relied on flawed science to conclude that greenhouse emissions endanger public health and welfare," Abbott said. "Because the Administration predicated its Endangerment Finding on the IPCC's questionable facts, the state is seeking to prevent the EPA's new rules, and the economic harm that will result from these regulations, from being imposed on Texas employers, workers, and enforcement agencies."

The IPCC has become the laughing stock of science, with numerous revelations of sloppy research, science, and in one report, a prediction that glaciers would melt in 25 years was due to a researcher mixing numbers, and writing '2035' including '2350,' which was the year the glaciers were really expected to be in danger.

One of the rules imposed by the EPA would extend clean air regulations to the tailpipes of personal cars and trucks, but Abbott says the pollutants which the EPA aims to restrict by this rule aren't even found in internal combustion vehicles.

One of the rules, the so called 'Tailoring Rule,' would require that all Texas clean air regulations be 'tailored' to match federal rules by January 2, 2011, or the US EPA will impose it's rules on Texas.

"Today's court filings challenge the EPA's attempts to ignore federal law, impose their federally mandated deadlines and force Texas to spend millions of dollars advancing the Administration’s regulatory agenda," Abbott said.

[Monorprise]

“How can AMERICANS be fined, imprisoned, regulated by the EPA? No one elected them, they are not answerable to the people, they have no authority we can appeal to, they are unidentified by name and address, they are ubiquitous, they have demonstrated malice toward free enterprise — who the hell ARE these dictators?”

Not to be nitpicking but technically we can appall to the federal government’s own court systems. But that’s asking them to reconsider their edict.

Of course the EPA is no where authorized by our constitution it doesn’t take long to figure that out. But the Federal courts and the legal profession specialize in getting around the limits of the law.

It is not in their interest to follow the law nor is it in the interest of Federal politicians to appoint “justices” that regular enforce the limits of the constitution upon them.

As Elena Kagan promised in her confirmation hearings, she will support the power of the government.

So our Constitution really is dead, so long as states cannot nully the edicts of the Federal Government, and the Federal Governments is the sole decider of what is and what is not within the limits of its own power.

Under Constitutional theory the proper course of action for us is to declare the Constitution as being dead and as such our bonds to the Union no longer in effect. But of course The power hungry monsters will object to such a declaration as they did in 1861. If they behave as the tyrant Lincoln behaved they will attempt uses the sword to force their unconditional and unlimited power down our throats.

As a result I can only suggest that we raise awareness about how our Constitution is really dead. the General public must be made aware of this fact so that the uprising is broad spectrum and we can abolish the lawless government.

[Judith Anne]

Actually I know all that and essentially agree with you, except I do not think that the Constitution is dead. Marxists in high positions have attempted to render it powerless, but there are citizens, many more than we know, who will defend it and confront those who would destroy it.