White House Refused to Open Pollutants E-Mail »
Posted By Beau7890 3 months, 2 weeks ago in NewsThe White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency's conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
Submitted By:
Beau7890
I used to have a quote here from Andre Breton, author of several surrealist works.
I now think that if you're here on Propeller ...
Also submitted:
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 43
-
-
-
0%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
Seriously...read the article.
The EPA told the government about its conclusions, and they refused to listen. They e-mailed the conclusions (as anyone in a competitive office has learned to do) so there'd be a written record.
The Bush people at the White House REFUSED to open the e-mail. They're like, two years old: "I can't see it, so it must not exist!"
Reply -
0%
santa03 months, 1 week ago
that's how its handled libs. you email things to get digital postmarks and copies. actual files get 'lost' and GW refuses to make time in the schedule to meet with the EPA cause as Beau put it, he has the mentality of a 2 year old and thinks that plausible deniability extends to instances where you stick your fingers in your ears and sing 'henry VIII' at the top of your lungs.
is that what the republican talking points say on this issue? 'if it were so important why email it?' that's pretty weak. you guys have practically resigned the death of your party and aren't even trying any more.
Email is the fastest, most reliable, and best documented means of information sharing and communication, and you're just upset that Karl Rove has left the white house now and no one was around to delete this email from the white house servers.
Reply -
0%
cushi3 months, 1 week ago
You are so out of it. Email is one of the fastest, most efficient ways to communicate these days and more and more business and organizations are moving to that mode. It cuts down on the cost of paper and long distance phone calls AND it provides a record for legal purposes, too. Leave it to a myopic repug to pooh pooh the use of a very wonderful tool for communication.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
TweekerchickQC3 months, 2 weeks ago
Hey. The LA-LA-LA I CANT HEAR YOU LA-LA-LA tactic has worked well on family members since the beginning of the internets, you almost can't blame him for trying.
Reply -
0%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
"Ah yes, the old "LA LA LA -- I CAN'T HEAR YOU -- LA LA LA" tactic.
"Well played, Bushie."
It's similar to the "I'M RUBBER AND YOU'RE GLUE" tactic Republican political operatives have been pulling for the past couple of decades when Republicans are accused of overspending while lowering revenue.
The scariest thing of all is, it's been working.
Reply
-
0%
BB643 months, 2 weeks ago
I think it's time for the EPA to explain their stands for the last 30 years. Every time industry meets or even gets close to the current requirements, they lower the standards. While I also want clean air, I'd also like a chance to work, eat and have a house to live in. Again, let's look at Milwaukee. We've driven off 5 major breweries, 2 yeast plants, several tanneries, 3 tractor plants, a car plant, Tower/AO Smith and dozens of others but for some reason we simply can't meet the latest clean air standards. Why? Because the only sensor that caused us to fail and continues to cause of to fail is on Lake Michigan. And ozone from the lake is the cause. So we have to use crap gas, test cars every year, and a dozen other scams because we're an "attainment zone". I think that's a fancy way of saying that as long as we fail, the local EPA guys keep their jobs.
BTW-most of those jobs went to Mexico and now China. Way to go EPA!!
Reply-
0%
memestryker3 months, 2 weeks ago
It's always a balance between economics and other competing values, and we've turned the U.S. into a nation of consumers who can no longer provide essentials in an emergency. Now people are losing jobs and income is disappearing for those still employed, and it will get worse when we downscale the war, as it always does.
The fact is, when we are extremely tough in an area, there is always another country willing to forego controls in that area in order to steal the industry. Bill Moyers NOW showed how predatory companies flit from country to country, always seeking a more desperate workforce willing to work for less and less. And we buy those products in our discount stores and don't even think about the fact that we perpetuate it ourselves.
Reply
-
-
0%
Charlson3 months, 2 weeks ago
Jason Burnett, the associate deputy administrator said, "The next administration will have to face what this one did not."
Referring to regulations to control greenhouse gases and the ramifications it entails. This administration will resist any regulation of greenhouse gases because it cuts into the profits of the shareholders of polluting corporations.
Reply-
-
0%
GWHayduke3 months, 2 weeks ago
I dont have the statistics, but my guess is that more Americans have been killed by Al Qaeda under Bush's watch than since AQ's inception.
Heckuva job, Dumby.
Oh, yeah...gotta fightem there so we dont hafta fightem here.
And please spare us your inevitable Clintonian rant.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
memestryker3 months, 2 weeks ago
That's one way to avoid acknowledging the problem exists.
Of course, we've known for a long time that greenhouse gases were a problem, but the moniker "global warming" has overshadowed it and become a target for anti-environment extremists. Gore has always been one to give every project 100%, which was appropriate in the case of the National Research and Education Network initiative, but is a hard sell in an area where science and conjecture mix.
Reply -
0%
bigurn3 months, 2 weeks ago
I could not read the Times article. If someone can post it, I would appreciate that.
Having said that, I wonder if anyone can guess the most abundant greenhouse gas on the planet? The answer to that question impacts every energy policy world wide.
It's water vapor, and it's as high as 70% of all greenhouse gas. CO2 only contributes 26% (maximum) and methane 9% (max). Logically, to make a large difference we need to control the largest source. Tell me, then, how we are to control something that covers 70% of the Earth's surface?
Post the article, and I'm sure I'll have more to say. But I will be looking for the hook that tells me that money will be shifted from the "bad" technology, to the "good" technology. Then I'll know that it's just another income redistribution scheme.
Reply-
0%
libsRfunny3 months, 2 weeks ago
Water vapor is close to 95 percent of "greenhouse gases." CO2 comes after Water Vapor and Methane.
Reply -
0%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
-
0%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
I was trying to edit the comment above to include the following, but it didn't take:
About your question ("How are we to control something that covers 70% of the Earth's surface?"), the atmosphere (as well as everything else on Earth is in a very delicate balance. But change the percentage by just a little bit, and things go quickly out of wack. The idea is to maintain the current ratio of gases, not remove CO2 entirely.
By the way, the composition of the Earth's atmosphere is 78% nitrogen, 20% oxygen, and only 2% other gases, which includes CO2.
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/atmos_origin...
Reply -
0%
bigurn3 months, 2 weeks ago
Got it, Beau. Thanks. Now how did our discussion turn from greenhouse gases abundancy to composition of the atmosphere? I dunno, but I agree with your numbers.
Even presuming the CO2 is 50% man-made, and even presuming the U.S. (30% of all CO2 production) cuts their CO2 production by 50%, the CO2 abundancy drops from 26% max to 24.05% max. Now... the *range* of abundancy of CO2 as a greenhouse gas is 9-26%. That's a 17% spread, but even using colossal assumptions we've only moved the needle 1.95%, which is well within that range. The point is this: we're chasing the wrong target if we want to change greenhouse gas impact on the Earth.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
disraeli3 months, 2 weeks ago
Water is also a part of life but too much of it, say if your head was under it, is terminally detrimental.
I don't understand why the simple concept of system balance is so difficult to grasp.
On the spectrum of all possible physical environments human life can only exist in a very small range. Go outside that range and life ceases to be viable. Simple really.
Any number of gases, chemical compounds, electromagnetic radiation is necessary for life but too much (or too little) of any one of them is fatal.
I'm not saying that global warming (or climate change or whatever the current term is) is necessarily going to be fatal, but logic dictates if you have a sensitive system on which you depend absolutely and that system has been working fine one shouldn't screw around with the system.
Reply
-
-
0%
protoham3 months, 2 weeks ago
Big Deal.
Does the President propose legislation? No, Congress does. All the President can do is approve or disapprove legislation.
If you want someone to blame, blame your congressman or congresswoman.
This is just like the "no child left behind" crap, that was proposed by Ted Kennedy, not Bush.
Reply -
0%
cloud153 months, 2 weeks ago
Well might as well add Water Vapor to that list of pollutants...is the EPA kidding with this?
Reply -
0%
silvera3 months, 2 weeks ago
It looks like the expert climatologists weighing in on this one got most of their information from Exxon Mobile. That's where Bush gets his. He certainly wouldn't want to read anything that contradicts his flat earth policies.
Reply -
0%
RCHIII3 months, 2 weeks ago
Beau7890 is correct. There is a balance in the atmosphere that needs to be maintained. The fact that there are still some Republicans that don't believe it simply means they haven't gotten the new talking points from the party leaders. Should we tell them that their party nominated someone who believes that global warming exists?
Reply -
0%
Mdiar3 months, 2 weeks ago
I really thought this was something posted by ind06 and in humour at first... then I read past the title and description.
Reply -
0%
flitzer3 months, 1 week ago
The White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency's. The White House told the pollutants problem. The Senoir officers do not open the mail and not take any action.
==========...
flitzer
RateTag - India's World Class Online Shopping Mall - Experience the Magic. Buy Mobile Phones, Computers, Electronics, Gifts, Flowers, Apparel, Shoes, Toys, Video Games, Music, DVD, Software, Digital Cameras, Musical Instruments, Camcorders and thousands of other products.
Online Shopping of Gifts to India
Reply
Add a Comment
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.