Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BUSH DISMISSES ADMINISTRATION REPORT ON 'WARMING'
Drudge ^ | Drudge

Posted on 06/04/2002 10:06:01 AM PDT by CoolGuyVic

"'I read the report put out by the bureaucracy,' Bush said dismissivly... "

More to come, I'm sure


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: drudge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,061 next last
To: Badray
I don't have numbers off the top of my head ..

Look .. I realize that laws and funding will not stop abortions

Abortions have been going on for many many many years even before Roe v. Wade

But like Grandpa said .. one step at a time .. we cannot solve this problem over night and it will take some time to get people to understand exactly what they are doing

Now I don't mean to bug out but I need to get dinner on the table and help the kiddies to study for finals ..

BBL

681 posted on 06/04/2002 2:50:46 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: marajade
I can't believe Rush did what he did... It really hurts... Thanks for all your effort on these threads.... I'll make sure to special point of reading your posts more thoroughly...

Thank you for your kind words Marajade, but don't build up my ego too much, I might start acting like limbaugh or the other reactionary Bush basher know it alls on FR. :^)

682 posted on 06/04/2002 2:50:54 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Please give me some real numbers on these "deaths" .... you claim are NOW caused by air poluttion......

I grant that 20 a year is a problem, but it it worth the destruction of 260 million lives when you destroy the economy?

How many REAL LIVES are going to be ruined and REAL HEALTH hazards increased (or worsened/shortened) by the depression that results when the US economy is cut by 20% to meet your artificial atmospheric limts?

683 posted on 06/04/2002 2:52:25 PM PDT by Robert A Cook PE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 655 | View Replies]

To: eraser X
YOU made a claim, you directed a remark at me, and made a generalization. BACK IT UP WITH FACTS.
684 posted on 06/04/2002 2:52:36 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 680 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
A deciever?? .. Oh do us all a favor and Grow Up

I can remember Bush debating Gore, claiming he was for smaller government, and Gore wasn't. LOL. decieving, wasn't it? Ever read the patriot Act? WoW.

685 posted on 06/04/2002 2:54:22 PM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I love George Bush. I love Rush Limbaugh. They each serve this country in unique ways and I fail to see the need to choose sides. Would President Bush have made any comment for public consumption about this issue if Rush had not screamed loud and clear? I have been driven near crazy over the superior attitude of republican party leaders who in past years have been too above it all to counter democrat lies and misinformation with the truth. We can't let even one misrepresentation of our position on anything slide by without question. Rush has been bashed for being a Bush robot and now for not being one. Bush has been bashed for not being conservative enough. I appreciate the efforts of both these men and glad we're on the same side.
686 posted on 06/04/2002 2:54:32 PM PDT by mountainfolk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
All the jackasses (including Rush Limabaugh) who were harping about this the past couple of days owe the President a big apology.

Well, to be honest, it did appear that the bushies had done a 180 on the issue.

However, Rush is generally open to making apologies when appropriate.

687 posted on 06/04/2002 2:55:04 PM PDT by Smedley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Thanks as I mostly see the flip side posted on FR..... but then I don't read many of the Rush threads either...... I guess either I miss them or they aren't being posted for discussion....
688 posted on 06/04/2002 2:56:09 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 677 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Not only that, take a look at this remark from his website:

"The administration blames mostly human actions for recent global warming and says the main culprit is the burning of fossil fuels that send heat-trapping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. George W. Algore, anyone?"

If you look up this thread a few hours, you will find some people defending Rush, telling us that HE never said that, that some caller said that.

689 posted on 06/04/2002 2:58:05 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Thank you for your kind words Marajade, but don't build up my ego too much, I might start acting like limbaugh or the other reactionary Bush basher know it alls on FR. :^)

You? Never...

690 posted on 06/04/2002 2:58:09 PM PDT by marajade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
You're the one enumerating products not to buy which Rush advertises on his show.

Rush is the consistent one. Everyone yesterday was saying the NYT mischaracterized the report. But Bush distanced himself from the report. Rush is right, Bush is right and you and your anti-Rush buddies are wrong. Get over it.

691 posted on 06/04/2002 2:58:29 PM PDT by eraser X
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
This report was written by the EPA under the CLINTON administration by suedo scientists. It is a flawed study. It was posted on the EPA website and the report is due to be released NOW. It was the always truthful NYT that released this with altogether misleading statements. Drudge, always trying to top his Monica Scoop, jumped on it. Rush picked up the NYT trash and Drudge and ran with it. I am amazed at Rush and it tells me he has an agenda not friedly to our President, without doing any research whatsoever.

You must be pleased as you and Rush are obvously of a mind set and no matter what this President did you would find vocal and vitriolic fault. You are not less rediculous today than you were yesterday.

692 posted on 06/04/2002 3:00:06 PM PDT by wingnuts'nbolts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: deport
Does Rush spend any time on debunking Daschle, Gephart, the lack of Senate action on Judicial Nominees, promoting the taking back of the Senate, or just Pro Republican stances? If so is it a small or large percentage of his radio time?

Because of a years long habit of listening to Rush, although recently I have been very disappointed in his programs, and because I heard Drudge going hysterical Sunday night on his program, yesterday I decided to tune in to Rush to see if he was going to address the issue of this EPA report.

To answer your question, it seems to me that he has been fixated on Bush 'not doing enough, not using the bully pulpit, signing CFR, hugging Ted Kennedy, etc etc. The moment he said George W Gore is the last moment I will listen in the future.

And to answer your question: no, he has not been spending much time at all promoting Republican candidates, or judgeships or criticizing Democrats. Probably 80% Bash Bush and 20% Bash democrats - that is 80:20 of the 25% that is not devoted to golf, Marta conversations or outings with the rich and powerful.

693 posted on 06/04/2002 3:00:19 PM PDT by maica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I question the validity of comparing a third-world nation like Peru with environmental quality laws in the US. In a place like Peru, where much of the populace is already nearly impoverished, or where adequate health care is sparse, you may have a point. Your supposition that reducing people's wealth through costly regulations thereby reduces their access to life-saving products and services is just that: a supposition. I doubt anyone's personal wealthy has been so destroyed by the cost of environmental laws that their access to essential live-saving products or services has been limited. It is reasonable to say that in some cases (not widespread) some environmental laws have made certain businesses unprofitable. That is entirely possible. But that's quite different than saying people will die.

The only example I can think of is the addition of MTBE in California gasoline as a means of controlling carbon monoxide emissions from cars. MTBE is toxic and cancer causing, and leaking underground storage tanks has resulted in a few cases of MTBE getting into groundwater. But there are alternatives to MTBE in terms of gasoline oxygenates. The choice was made by gasoline producers, and it turned out to be a bad choice; it wasn't a case of bad law.

694 posted on 06/04/2002 3:01:19 PM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents; B Knotts
B Knotts and I are not in any agreement re Rush and his actions here. However, he is exactly correct that enviro whackos can kill you.

The banning of DDT by the enviro whackos results in the daily deaths of people in Africa and other third world countries the equivalent of several fully loaded 747's going down each day. Malaria will kill you, if you don't kill the mosquitoes.

The addition of MTBE in the gasoline in Kali resulted in a lot of car fires as the MTBE ate away the neophrene gaskets and started car fires while people were in their cars or when they parked their cars in garages below their apartments and condos. In the early days of MTBE in our cars, we had deaths from fires caused by the MYBE eating away the neophrene gas gaskets.

MTBE is a known carcinogen and may be giving cancer to all of us in Kali as it has polluted over 20,000 drinking water sites. MTBE was put in as a clean air mandate. Our pumps say that MTBE is hazardous to the environment.

Last year 3 young fire fighters lost their lives in Washington due to a cluster you know what of enviral laws. First of all envirals prevent any clearing of dead wood, brush and other burnable materials in the forest where they were killed to protect some epa critter. Then, when the fire broke out and pinned them down, the helicopter with a water bucket could not pick up water from the near by stream to protect them. There were so called endangered native trout and steelhead in the stream. Stupid enviral whacko forestry rules killed those 3 young forestry workers last summer.

When loggers, ranchers, farmers and others lose their jobs, lands and work due to Rural cleansing by the enviral whackos, many people commit suicide when their money runs out and they have no alternative. The families in these targeted rural cleansing areas become dysfunctional and dangerous to the members of the family.

Just a few examples of how enviralists can kill you or hurt you. Oh yeah, the last way is the most wicked way. I have yet to meet an enviral elite who doesn't push abortions 24/7. That kills people, the innocent babies. The elite envirals hate all humans except themselves and those who wait on them.

695 posted on 06/04/2002 3:01:28 PM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: eraser X
I see, you cannot back up your statements can you? Be more careful with your generalizations next time.
696 posted on 06/04/2002 3:01:44 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: rintense
At least you're honest. :-)
697 posted on 06/04/2002 3:02:23 PM PDT by oldvike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

Comment #698 Removed by Moderator

To: Mo1
" Now I don't mean to bug out but I need to get dinner on the table and help the kiddies to study for finals .."

Sure you do. Your little ones are so small that they can't possibly eat more than once a day. ;-)

I agree that we have to move back to sanity and decency incrementally. But so few people understand R -v- W, they think a decision by SCOTUS solves the problem. If laws worked, the would be no more murders at all, not just murders of innocent unborns. We have a long way to go, and I know you won't like this, but I'm not totally convinced that W is the man who can get us there. He has disappointed me too many times. I voted for him. I worked to get him elected. But I held my nose the whole time. Maybe disappointed is too strong a word. I voted for him over Gore because I couldn't stand the thought of "Gore" and "President" being used together, but a year before he even announced any interest in running, I knew he was going to be the next POTUS. I started holding my nose then and while working on the Keyes campaign.

699 posted on 06/04/2002 3:03:35 PM PDT by Badray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
That's an interesting page. Let's add that to the record...

C|E|I     competitive enterprise institute


EPA Global Warming Report Violates White House Agreement To Settle Lawsuit
Report Relying On Discredited Science Previously Disavowed As Official Policy
Press Release
by CEI Staff
June 3, 2002

Washington, D.C., June 3, 2002—The Environmental Protection Agency’s latest report on global warming to the United Nations, Climate Action Report 2002, violates an agreement between the White House and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, three members of Congress, and other non-profit advocacy groups, struck in settlement of a lawsuit.  The report relies in part on the discredited National Assessment on Climate Change.

 

As a result of the lawsuit filed in October 2000, the Bush Administration ultimately agreed in September 2001 to withdraw the National Assessment and stated that its unlawfully produced conclusions are “not policy positions or official statements of the U.S. government.”  EPA has ignored this agreement in issuing its report to the United Nations. 

 

“Through Freedom of Information Act inquiries, we learned that the National Assessment was hurriedly slapped together in an incomplete and inaccurate form,” said Christopher C. Horner, CEI counsel who filed the lawsuit.  “The current Climate Action Report inappropriately cites the disgraced National Assessment, in clear violation of the spirit and letter of our agreement with the White House in return for withdrawing our suit.”

 

Adds Myron Ebell, director of global warming policy at CEI:  “The Administration has recognized that the National Assessment is the worst sort of junk science.  For the EPA now to accept the National Assessment’s findings as valid undermines and contradicts President Bush’s global warming policies.  The EPA needs to be told that the Clinton Administration is gone and Al Gore did not win the election.”

The lawsuit against the White House’s flawed climate science was brought jointly by CEI, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Representatives Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) and Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO), and other non-profit advocacy groups.  CEI’s pleadings in the case can be found in the docket at the federal District Court for the District of Columbia (CV 00-02383).


This makes it sound as though the EPA report is merely a rogue faction of the government defying the White House. But where's the statement to that effect from the administration? One can kinda-sorta-maybe read it into Bush's "bureaucracy" crack, but given that he's never argued against the very idea of "global warming", that would be a charitable stretch.

700 posted on 06/04/2002 3:03:54 PM PDT by Redcloak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 626 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,061 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson