[Talisker]

The case comes after the Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that greenhouse-gas emissions could be regulated under the Clean Air Act if EPA found they endanger public health and welfare. The high court's decision formed the underpinning for its authority to issue climate regulations.

In this ruling the Court indicated that the method they would hear to overthrow EPA greenhouse gas nonsense was by arguing empirical evidence for the lack of harm. That's the way they want to go, and that's what should be argued, because the scientific evidence is overwhelming that there is no harm from the release of these gases by human sources, compared to their release by natural sources and their overall amounts anyway.

Instead, we get a suit over State or EPA control over power companies. It's a setup to fail.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

The case comes after the Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that greenhouse-gas emissions could be regulated under the Clean Air Act if EPA found they endanger public health and welfare.

IF they found they endanger....?

If we have a new GOP POTUS in 2013, one of the highest priorities should be to fire Lisa Jackson and other traitors. Of course that assumes that whoever that POTUS would be would not be a traitor.