| |
Main
Date: 07 Dec 2006 13:30:29
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
|
|
| |
Date: 08 Dec
From: RMHisCOOL
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
On Dec 7 2006 4:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
> The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
> polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
> policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
> according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA is, of course, a rock solid fountain of information. I haven't placed
any trust in much that they've said since their bullshit study on second hand
smoke was ruled invalid by the North Carolina Supreme Court. Having looked at
the study myself, and finding the numbers completely skewed and biased, I
haven't had much faith since. I'm not saying that your point is not correct,
because it could well be, I'm just saying the EPA's findings are not always the
unbiased truth (IMO). As a disclaimer to the left wing opposition I can always
count on, I don't know anything about anything else in this post. I just don't
trust the EPA, and I have a state's Supreme Court on my side.
Rory
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 08 Dec
From: jd00123
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
On Dec 7 2006 7:45 PM, RMHisCOOL wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 7 2006 4:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
>
> > The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
> > polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
> > policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
> > according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
>
> The EPA is, of course, a rock solid fountain of information. I haven't placed
> any trust in much that they've said since their bullshit study on second hand
> smoke was ruled invalid by the North Carolina Supreme Court. Having looked at
> the study myself, and finding the numbers completely skewed and biased, I
> haven't had much faith since. I'm not saying that your point is not correct,
> because it could well be, I'm just saying the EPA's findings are not always
> the
> unbiased truth (IMO). As a disclaimer to the left wing opposition I can
> always
> count on, I don't know anything about anything else in this post. I just
> don't
> trust the EPA, and I have a state's Supreme Court on my side.
>
> Rory
>
North Carolinas supreme court rules against epa's finding in second hand smoke
case. Wow, what a suprise. RJ Reynolds owns the friggin state.
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | |
Date: 07 Dec 2006 18:04:47
From: NCL
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
"RMHisCOOL" <43084107@recpoker.com > wrote in message
news:1165542350$918151@recpoker.com...
>
>
> On Dec 7 2006 4:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
>
>> The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
>> polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
>> policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
>> according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
>
> The EPA is, of course, a rock solid fountain of information. I haven't
> placed
> any trust in much that they've said since their bullshit study on second
> hand
> smoke was ruled invalid by the North Carolina Supreme Court. Having looked
> at
> the study myself, and finding the numbers completely skewed and biased, I
> haven't had much faith since. I'm not saying that your point is not
> correct,
> because it could well be, I'm just saying the EPA's findings are not
> always the
> unbiased truth (IMO). As a disclaimer to the left wing opposition I can
> always
> count on, I don't know anything about anything else in this post. I just
> don't
> trust the EPA, and I have a state's Supreme Court on my side.
>
Did you actually read the original post?
|
| | | |
Date: 08 Dec
From: Porsche_Dan
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
On Dec 7 2006 8:04 PM, NCL wrote:
> "RMHisCOOL" <43084107@recpoker.com> wrote in message
> news:1165542350$918151@recpoker.com...
> >
> >
> > On Dec 7 2006 4:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
> >
> >> The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
> >> polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
> >> policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
> >> according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
> >
> > The EPA is, of course, a rock solid fountain of information. I haven't
> > placed
> > any trust in much that they've said since their bullshit study on second
> > hand
> > smoke was ruled invalid by the North Carolina Supreme Court. Having looked
> > at
> > the study myself, and finding the numbers completely skewed and biased, I
> > haven't had much faith since. I'm not saying that your point is not
> > correct,
> > because it could well be, I'm just saying the EPA's findings are not
> > always the
> > unbiased truth (IMO). As a disclaimer to the left wing opposition I can
> > always
> > count on, I don't know anything about anything else in this post. I just
> > don't
> > trust the EPA, and I have a state's Supreme Court on my side.
> >
> Did you actually read the original post?
Does anybody actually read posts from OrangeSFO? And if you didn't bump them the
rest of us wouldn't either.
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 08 Dec
From: Vegas Vic
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
Ya know Dan its the devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other. We don't
want to reply but sometimes Orange's little red buddy wins and we do.
On Dec 7 2006 9:08 PM, Porsche_Dan wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 7 2006 8:04 PM, NCL wrote:
>
> > "RMHisCOOL" <43084107@recpoker.com> wrote in message
> > news:1165542350$918151@recpoker.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 7 2006 4:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
> > >
> > >> The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
> > >> polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
> > >> policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
> > >> according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
> > >
> > > The EPA is, of course, a rock solid fountain of information. I haven't
> > > placed
> > > any trust in much that they've said since their bullshit study on second
> > > hand
> > > smoke was ruled invalid by the North Carolina Supreme Court. Having looked
> > >
> > > at
> > > the study myself, and finding the numbers completely skewed and biased, I
> > > haven't had much faith since. I'm not saying that your point is not
> > > correct,
> > > because it could well be, I'm just saying the EPA's findings are not
> > > always the
> > > unbiased truth (IMO). As a disclaimer to the left wing opposition I can
> > > always
> > > count on, I don't know anything about anything else in this post. I just
> > > don't
> > > trust the EPA, and I have a state's Supreme Court on my side.
> > >
> > Did you actually read the original post?
>
> Does anybody actually read posts from OrangeSFO? And if you didn't bump them
> the
> rest of us wouldn't either.
>
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
| |
Date: 07 Dec 21:48:37
From: Vegas Vic
Subject: Re: OT: Bush Declares Air Too Clean
|
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
On Dec 7 2006 1:30 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:
> The Bush administration wants restrictions relaxed for how much lead
> polluters can spew into the air relaxed because existing environmental
> policies have lowered the level of lead in the air enough already,
> according to a draft report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
|
|
