Comments on: Trump Hates You, His Supporters, And Our Planet

By: Wow

Wow — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 21:32:24 +0000

“but the Federal government has to find clean power under an existing law.”

Nope. Wrong again.

By: Wow

Wow — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 21:31:29 +0000

“Wow is wrong (again).”

No I’m not, dick! I’m right (again)!

By: MikeN

MikeN — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:17:14 +0000

It will be challenged, but I think Trump and head of EPA can argue it is not legally valid and pull it for that reason. There is no need to undo the endangerment finding. My reading of it is that the law cannot work because of greenhouse gas restrictions implemented previously by the Obama Administration. Oops!

Correction to above. While Tribe did argue it was unconstitutional, the issue I explained is that it is illegal under the Clean Air Act. They cannot regulate under section 111d power plants that are regulated under sections 112.

By: RickA

RickA — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:11:57 +0000

Wow #13:

Wow is wrong (again).

Nothing forbids clean power being required by a state – but the Federal government has to find clean power under an existing law.

The EPA overreached and the case is pending in Federal court.

I wonder if it will be dismissed because of Trump’s executive order or will the case continue?

By: Wow

Wow — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:56:05 +0000

“Lawrence Tribe has explained why the Clean Power Plan is unconstitutional.”

And he was wrong.

Nothing forbids clean power being required, any more than it requires trash to be cleaned off the street outside or your garbage bin.

By: Wow

Wow — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:54:54 +0000

Maybe not.

But they’re concentrating, like humans do, on the negative of what they fear, not the positive or fears for others.

They’re rich. If things change, that might change. It might mean “more rich” and generally has, but that’s not what they fear, they fear getting “less rich”. So they concentrate on that.

To cope with that being at odds with fucking the planet they live on over and the future generations, they have to deny the risk even exists.

Besides, it’s only those scummy hippies and commies and other haters who talk about it, so it’s “likely” just another tactic for those hippies to get in the way of them being even richer again.

By: L.Long

L.Long — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:35:59 +0000

Its not so much that he HATES anything, it more of he don’t care about anything but himself! Why should he care about climate change? He is living high on what we now have and do, & he has no wish to change or force other like people (1%-ers) to give up anything. They are all dead in 50 yrs, so will never see the effects of their indifference.

By: MikeN

MikeN — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:25:42 +0000

Lawrence Tribe has explained why the Clean Power Plan is unconstitutional. The plan is based on the idea that Congress passed two versions of the law, and the Senate version is the correct one and the House version that has been codified for 25 years is wrong. The House passed an amendment that would not allow CPP, while the Senate amendment to the same part of the law was a very minor change. Apparently both are in the law as passed. EPA now says because the Senate passed a minor change, they are free to ignore the amendment in the law as passed by the House, even though it was made clear at the time that the House language is what matters, and is in Congress’s manual for how to handle such situations.

By: Wow

Wow — Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:58:57 +0000

Why should we only be worried about one fuckup at a time?

Yes, we know you don’t have enough room in that tiny noggin for more than one idea, but most of us aren’t so limited

By: dean

dean — Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:12:13 +0000

And once again we see the dangers of choosing to give up any attempt at critical thought–as one must, and mikeN did, when becoming a libertarian (or loonatarian, as they are more properly called): you begin thinking comments like #7 are witty and clever.